Manifest Destiny: The Conflicts Of American And Native American Indians
Greediness and the desire to expand more to the West, in order to acquire more lands, were the main reasons for conflict and wars between the white population of America and the Native American Indians. They could not mutually agree, as they both wanted the best for themselves. The Native Americans were sceptical towards the whites and the whites on the other hand didn’t trust the Native Americans. Many of the white population were running out of room on the East Coast of America. As the US believed in the concept of “Manifest Destiny”, which consisted in filling the whole continent with loyal white Americans, this would inevitably lead to conflict, as the Native Americans wouldn’t have anywhere to live. It must also be noted, the importance of religion in the Indian tradition, it was even considered as a way of communication with foreigners. Indeed, the Indian religion was profoundly different to that of whites, it involved a belief in the sacredness of the land. The chief of the tribe did not have a total power over the actions of his tribe. This was a good system, but the whites could not understand it. Hence, the
…show more content…
presence of racial misunderstandings and conflicts between the white population and the Indians. One must be also aware, that unlike other ethnic groups that now dwell in the United States, Native Americans were the original residents of this country, they were neither brought to America by force, nor by immigration.
Many anthropologists and historians including Philippe Jacquin, who was specialized in the American West, wrote several books regarding the issues between the United States and Indians recounting the history and reasons behind the strained and hostile relations, they have maintained with each other. Jacquin was born in France at Donville-les-Bains in January, 1942 and died at Lyon in September 2002. Among the books he has published, there is “The Indian Policy of the United States (1830-1890)”. Along this book, he outlined the history of American Indians and their hostile relations with the American settlers; including the inconstant policy that the US had adopted with Indians along history, in order to conquer the American West.
In examining the issue of American Indian policy in Jacquin’s book, and the extent to which it exploited the Native Americans, it is fundamental to investigate the historical relationship between the Native Indians and the white settlers, throughout the colonial period and through the later stages of American development. One should additionally study the principles of land ownership, the varying attitudes towards the Indians following removal, from exclusion to Americanisation, and whether the experiences of the different tribal groups were universal or as diverse as their own cultures and customs.
First and foremost, the Industrial Revolution in the early nineteenth century had an enormous impact on the lives of Native American Indians. As white settlers continued to move west, Indian inhabitants became an obstacle to achieving the “American Dream” of prosperity and social progress. Hence, there was a growing support for legalised means of removing Indians. Indeed, between 1825 and 1840, the American government created the permanent running along the 95th meridian. However, the US broke its promises, within eleven years, as White started going across into Native American lands. Despite being under the legitimacy of the US federal government, the American constitution did not really contribute in protecting Native American Indians as Jacquin asserted in his book, “La constitution américaine les ignore. Les pères Fondateurs ne souhaitent pas les legitimiser” (p.19, l.14-15). Hence, many white settlers believed that because land was a means of attaining success, and that the native, who had been living on this land had done little to cultivate it, so they thought that they were acting in a good manner by seeking to eliminate Native American Indians from the American soil. On the other hand, there is several relevant examples of Indian-European cooperation, such as Indian Princess Pocahontas’s to explorer John Smith. Indeed, a small proportion of the native nations were described by white settlers as being the “Five Civilised Tribes”, because of their willingness to negotiate and to conform to Western ways of living. These were the nations of Chickasaws, Creeks, Choctaws, Cherokees and Seminoles, who originally inhabited the present South-eastern region of North America.
Indeed, the presidential candidate Andrew Jackson used the Indian issue for his election campaign, advocating the removal of the aboriginal people onto the plains west of the Mississippi, an area which was hoped to be undesirable for white habitation for generations. It is vital to note that the removal policy which was adopted by Jackson, was originally Jefferson’s policy, as Jacquin affirmed in his work, “Contrairement à une idée recue, la nouvelle politique, l’Indian Removal, hante l’esprit des homes d’Etat depuis Jefferson. Après l’acquisition de la Louisiane, Thomas Jefferson se fait l’artisan de cette politique.” (p.34, l.26-29). Moreover, the majority of Indian tribes were unable to resist the power of Indian commissioners. Conflicts over land resulted in numerous bloody clashes, as it was the case of Black Hawk war of 1832, between the displaced Sauk and Fox tribes under chief Black Hawk and the white militia in Illinois and Wisconsin territory. Indeed, the army mobilised to evacuate them, chased them into Wisconsin territory and annihilated women and children, as they attempted to flee across the Mississippi. The war ended up with the defeat of Black Hawk.
On the other hand, the Cherokee, a nation of people who had adopted the white ways of life, establishing a republic and acquiring literacy. They did also put up resistance against American troops, unlike the other neighbouring Indian tribes (Seminole, Creek…). In fact, since the end of the eighteenth century, Cherokees had resided in the mountain of Northern Georgia and western North Carolina. They adopted a constitution in 1827, which stated that they were not subject to any other nation, as Jacquin stated in his book, “Devant la Cour Suprême, Wirt présente les Cherokees comme une nation souveraine, donc non soumise à la juridiction territorial à la Géorgie et indépendante de ses lois.” (P.43. l. 30-32). However, the following year, Georgia passed a legislation stipulating that after June 1830, the authority of state law would extend over the Cherokees residing within the boundaries of the state. Jacquin asserted along the papers that “Cherokees doivent donc se soumettre à la loi fédérale et à la loi de la Géorgie, le jugement de John Marshall reste sans ambiguité.” (p.44, l.16-18). Furthermore, in 1831, the Cherokees appealed for protection from the Supreme Court against the Georgians, but Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the Court lacked jurisdiction as the Cherokees were a domestic dependent nation, rather than a foreign state, however affirming that they had right to their lands until they wished to surrender them to the United States. Despite this reassurance, the Cherokee nation was forced by American soldiers (under the presidency of Jackson) to cede their lands in the Southeast in exchange for lands in the Indian territory west of the Arkansas. Hence, by 1838, over 14000 Cherokees were frogmarched west by thousands of American troops along the thousand mile “trail of tears”.
Significant changes occurred during the so called “antebellum years”. This period was characterized by the economic reconstruction but also the establishment of several treaties between the United-States and Indians, as means to remove them from their tribal lands.
The idea of separating Indians into reservations became very common, especially after the growing conflicts between the white populations and Native Americans. Hence, a new Indian policy was adopted, it was the policy of treaties and reservations. Indeed, the Indian policy of Texas was one of the most hostile ones. First, it must be noted that three basic types of Indian communities were settled in Texas: the tribes of the Hasinai and Caddodacho, “the immigrant tribes of the Cherokee, Kickapoos, Shawnees and Delawares, and the raiding bands of Comanches and Kiowas”. All of these three communities were fervently fought and attacked by Texans. It should be mention that the difficult relation between Indians and Texans did not change a lot after 1845 with Texas union to the American territory, as Native American Indians were continuously attacked by Texans, until they were removed into reservations. Added to this, the situation of Indians in the extreme Northwest was not better than those elsewhere. The latters were intimidated in order to sign treaties and cede their lands. The Indian policy which consisted on the system of reservations was also popularized in California. Under the terms of the Guadalupe Hidalgo treaty signed in 1848, the state was meant to protect native people. Nonetheless, the government failed to live up these terms, as Jacquin asserted, “Mais le Congrès semble ignorer les clauses du traité” (p.67, l.18-19).
Several brutal and violent confrontations occurred between the whitepopulation and Native American Indians. Added to this, Indians were also victims of many diseases and racial prejudices. Faced to such a difficult situation, the government chose to gather the Indians of California into reservations. One should also shed light on the fact that European-American settlers used many exploitative and illegal means of eradicating the Native American Indians from their lands. For instance, in 1850, the American settlers aimed to build a transcontinental. They did so, with the development of railroads, as the “Oregon Trail” and many others, however Jacquin claimed in his book that “Pawnees sont aussi mécontents de l’Oregon Trail qui traverse leur territoire, le bétail des immigrants détruisants leur champs”. This discontentment was dur to several reasons, but especially because American settlers were using immoral ways in order to compel Indians to cede their lands. For instance, the white population employed men to slaughter as many buffalo as possible, knowing that Sioux tribes depended upon the buffalo for their livelihoods, and would therefore either starve to death or retreat. On the same grounds, white settlers exploited the fact that the native people had no resistance to European diseases, such as measles and tuberculosis and transmitted these viruses to Indians.
In order to put an end to the inter-tribal clashes, the United-States decided to follow a new instruction or strategy with Indians.
Therefore, the American government produced the Fort Laramie treaty in 1851. In this, the government promised to give Indians 50 000$ a year for 10 years, if they didn’t attack the travellers going through their land. Fort Laramie treaty forced many tribes to share the same land. This was called the policy of concentration. However, these kinds of treaties turned to be against the interest of the American government, as tribes worked together. However, the peaceful ambiance did not maintain for so long, as inter-tribal clashes appeared again, especially after the discovery of gold between 1858 and 1862. Hence, the federal government found the reservation policy as the only choice but also the better solution for
Indians.
As gold was discovered in Montana in 1862, Gold miners flooded along the Bozeman trail that run through the Sioux country. This would led to conflicts, as it disturbed the Indians’ peace.
At Bluff Creek, the US government peace commission and the Indian chiefs agreed to lay down their arms and give up Sand Creek, in return for money and land in Oklahoma. Equally enough, in 1864, tensions started to rise between the American soldiers and Indians. Hence, forts were built along the Bozeman trail, and a brutal war was launched by Colonel Chivington, who murdered a Cheyenne tribe at Sand Creek, despite the fact that they were within reservation. This would lead to more conflicts and clashes, under the pretext that they weren’t even safe in reservations. It is vital also to mention the treaty of Fort Lyon signed in 1961, in which the US agreed to give reservations to Indians along the Oregon Trail, if they stopped attacking the whites and made and they abandoned the lands given to them in Fort Laramie treaty.
In March 1867, and after several clashes with Indians, the United-States decided to bring an end to the policy of concentration, therefore they introduced a policy of smaller reservations. The government decided to introduce this new policy because they didn’t want the Indians to work together, as it would endanger the whites’ benefits, but also because they needed more lands in order to expand. In conformity to this new policy, the tribes were split up into smaller groups whose foods were ensured by the government. However, this new strategy did not benefitted all tribes, as some of them found nowhere to hunt the buffalo, especially after reducing their reservations.
After the Civil War, in 1869, President Grant brought in a new peace policy, where Indians would be given the chance to live like white people (to go to school and to farm). However the latter were sceptical about Grant’s intentions, which seemed to be ambiguous as Jacquin asserted in his work. Indeed, Indians thought that this new policy was considered a kind of attack on their culture, notably that it contradicted their beliefs about the holy relationship with the land. Added to this, the Native American Indians’ lifestyle depended on hunting and they did never farm. Hence, in order to contain conflicts, generals Sheridan, Sherman and Custer led a campaign in 1868 in order to enforce the removal of all Indians into small reservations.
Indeed, the period after the Civil War was considered as a turning point in the Indian policy of the US, as the American government was drained of resources but also uncertain about continuing war with Indian nations. Hence, following the lengthy battle between the North and the South, the US signed the treaty of 1868 with the Lakota Indians, granting them some lands. However, when gold was discovered in the Black Hills of South Dakota. American troops severed the peace treaty and invaded the sacred Indians’ territory. In 1874, General George Custer led an exploring expedition of gold seekers into the Sioux (Lakota), hunting grounds despite the promises given that the militia would keep them out. A battle with the Indians resulted in the death of Custer and other American soldiers. Nonetheless, the Indians’ victory was only of a short term, as the army regained the offensive, and the Sioux were coerced into surrendering their hunting grounds and the gold fields in exchange for payment. A generation of Indian wars ended in 1886.
Despite the antagonistic and highly exploitive approach of frontiersmen towards the Indian nations, Eastern citizens were increasingly expressing a more humanitarian view towards Indians under the pretext that the latters were subject to many injustice. As a result of such opinions, Indian policy gradually became more humane.
The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 attempted to introduce the Native Americans to individual ownership and agriculture, as Jacquin told us in his work. This was done by allowing the president to divide the lands of any tribe and allocate acres to every head of family. Moreover, an increasing number of reformers sought to assimilate or “Americanise” the indian people by treating them as a homogeneous mass, rather than as diverse and sophisticated tribes, who should be “civilised” into accepting American Christian values. Their aim was the complete assimilation of Indians into mainstream American society. As it was the case of Carl Schurz, many others thought that the only alternative to extermination available to the Indians, was civilisation. However, Schurz was convinced of the superior status of Christian civilisation, so he rejected the idea of allowing the Native Americans the rights and privileges of American citizenship.
Finally, Jacquin’s book “La politique indienne des Etats-Unis (1830-1890)” is a well written book that offers a general view on the Indians’ relation with the united-States during the nineteenth century. Something that was not really surprising, as Philippe Jacquin was known for being an expert in Native American societies. He did fervently advocate the Indian cause by spreading the Native American Indians’ history but also his open and free thoughts, through his works. His book was not limited to a specific public, but it was addressed to every researcher, student or simply any person interested in the Native American’s history.
Throughout Jacquin’s papers, one could notice how the American policy was wholly exploitative, serving to legitimise a system of mass genocide, unconstitutionally attacking the personal liberties of the original inhabitants of the American lands and stripping them out of it. From the early colonial period, the European settlers exploited the aboriginal people, attempting to enslave them and attacking their villages and property. The white occupants failed to see these native people as belonging to a multiplicity of nations, each with its own language, religion and customs, perceiving the natives to be “primitive savages” who must be treated with inferiority. The frontiersmen saw Indians as an obstacle in achieving the American Dream of agricultural prosperity and expansion. They did even use the justification that Indians had made no use of their lands, in order to eradicate them. The absolute approach taken by president Jackson, to remove the Indian population was accompanied by massacres, broken promises and illegal means of coercion through blackmail, the deliberate spread of European diseases, but also the extinction of their major source of food, the buffalo.
Therefore, greediness and the desire to acquire more lands, especially that the white population was mostly composed of farmers, were the main reasons for conflict between the Whites and the Native American Indians. By the late 1870, there were many more whites in America than native people. During this period, the US government did also adopt a more humane approach to American Indian policy. This was manifested through the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887, which attempted to introduce the Native Americans to individual land ownership and agriculture. Although, the intentions of Christian reformers were altruistic and benevolent, their conformist and patronising policy served to dehumanise the Native people and strip them of their personal dignity and identity to the same extent, as the hard-line policy implemented by the American government.
REFERENCES:
1- George B. Tindall & David E. Shi, America, WW. Norton & Company, Inc, 1989.
2- David Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
3- Rachel Kranz, Straight Talk About Prejudice, Facts on File, Inc., 1992.
4- Francis Paul Prycha, Americanising the American Indians, University of Nebraska Press, 1973.
5- Edmund Jefferson Danzinger, Jr. United States Indian Policy During the Late Nineteenth Century: Change And Continuity. http://www.rbhayes.org/hayes/content/files/hayes_historical_journal/usindianpolicyhhj.htm
6- David L. Ghere, Jan F. Spreeman, US Indian Policy, 1815-1860: Removal To Reservations. http://www.learner.org/courses/amerhistory/pdf/USIndianPolicy_LOne.pdf
7- Native American During the 19th Century. http://hubpages.com/hub/Native-Americans-During-The-19th-Century
8- The American Indians (19th - 20th century). http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?groupid=1099&HistoryID=ab05>rack=pthc
9- Robert V. Hine & John Mack Faracher. The American West, A New Interpretive History.
presence of racial misunderstandings and conflicts between the white population and the Indians. One must be also aware, that unlike other ethnic groups that now dwell in the United States, Native Americans were the original residents of this country, they were neither brought to America by force, nor by immigration.
Many anthropologists and historians including Philippe Jacquin, who was specialized in the American West, wrote several books regarding the issues between the United States and Indians recounting the history and reasons behind the strained and hostile relations, they have maintained with each other. Jacquin was born in France at Donville-les-Bains in January, 1942 and died at Lyon in September 2002. Among the books he has published, there is “The Indian Policy of the United States (1830-1890)”. Along this book, he outlined the history of American Indians and their hostile relations with the American settlers; including the inconstant policy that the US had adopted with Indians along history, in order to conquer the American West.
In examining the issue of American Indian policy in Jacquin’s book, and the extent to which it exploited the Native Americans, it is fundamental to investigate the historical relationship between the Native Indians and the white settlers, throughout the colonial period and through the later stages of American development. One should additionally study the principles of land ownership, the varying attitudes towards the Indians following removal, from exclusion to Americanisation, and whether the experiences of the different tribal groups were universal or as diverse as their own cultures and customs.
First and foremost, the Industrial Revolution in the early nineteenth century had an enormous impact on the lives of Native American Indians. As white settlers continued to move west, Indian inhabitants became an obstacle to achieving the “American Dream” of prosperity and social progress. Hence, there was a growing support for legalised means of removing Indians. Indeed, between 1825 and 1840, the American government created the permanent running along the 95th meridian. However, the US broke its promises, within eleven years, as White started going across into Native American lands. Despite being under the legitimacy of the US federal government, the American constitution did not really contribute in protecting Native American Indians as Jacquin asserted in his book, “La constitution américaine les ignore. Les pères Fondateurs ne souhaitent pas les legitimiser” (p.19, l.14-15). Hence, many white settlers believed that because land was a means of attaining success, and that the native, who had been living on this land had done little to cultivate it, so they thought that they were acting in a good manner by seeking to eliminate Native American Indians from the American soil. On the other hand, there is several relevant examples of Indian-European cooperation, such as Indian Princess Pocahontas’s to explorer John Smith. Indeed, a small proportion of the native nations were described by white settlers as being the “Five Civilised Tribes”, because of their willingness to negotiate and to conform to Western ways of living. These were the nations of Chickasaws, Creeks, Choctaws, Cherokees and Seminoles, who originally inhabited the present South-eastern region of North America.
Indeed, the presidential candidate Andrew Jackson used the Indian issue for his election campaign, advocating the removal of the aboriginal people onto the plains west of the Mississippi, an area which was hoped to be undesirable for white habitation for generations. It is vital to note that the removal policy which was adopted by Jackson, was originally Jefferson’s policy, as Jacquin affirmed in his work, “Contrairement à une idée recue, la nouvelle politique, l’Indian Removal, hante l’esprit des homes d’Etat depuis Jefferson. Après l’acquisition de la Louisiane, Thomas Jefferson se fait l’artisan de cette politique.” (p.34, l.26-29). Moreover, the majority of Indian tribes were unable to resist the power of Indian commissioners. Conflicts over land resulted in numerous bloody clashes, as it was the case of Black Hawk war of 1832, between the displaced Sauk and Fox tribes under chief Black Hawk and the white militia in Illinois and Wisconsin territory. Indeed, the army mobilised to evacuate them, chased them into Wisconsin territory and annihilated women and children, as they attempted to flee across the Mississippi. The war ended up with the defeat of Black Hawk.
On the other hand, the Cherokee, a nation of people who had adopted the white ways of life, establishing a republic and acquiring literacy. They did also put up resistance against American troops, unlike the other neighbouring Indian tribes (Seminole, Creek…). In fact, since the end of the eighteenth century, Cherokees had resided in the mountain of Northern Georgia and western North Carolina. They adopted a constitution in 1827, which stated that they were not subject to any other nation, as Jacquin stated in his book, “Devant la Cour Suprême, Wirt présente les Cherokees comme une nation souveraine, donc non soumise à la juridiction territorial à la Géorgie et indépendante de ses lois.” (P.43. l. 30-32). However, the following year, Georgia passed a legislation stipulating that after June 1830, the authority of state law would extend over the Cherokees residing within the boundaries of the state. Jacquin asserted along the papers that “Cherokees doivent donc se soumettre à la loi fédérale et à la loi de la Géorgie, le jugement de John Marshall reste sans ambiguité.” (p.44, l.16-18). Furthermore, in 1831, the Cherokees appealed for protection from the Supreme Court against the Georgians, but Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the Court lacked jurisdiction as the Cherokees were a domestic dependent nation, rather than a foreign state, however affirming that they had right to their lands until they wished to surrender them to the United States. Despite this reassurance, the Cherokee nation was forced by American soldiers (under the presidency of Jackson) to cede their lands in the Southeast in exchange for lands in the Indian territory west of the Arkansas. Hence, by 1838, over 14000 Cherokees were frogmarched west by thousands of American troops along the thousand mile “trail of tears”.
Significant changes occurred during the so called “antebellum years”. This period was characterized by the economic reconstruction but also the establishment of several treaties between the United-States and Indians, as means to remove them from their tribal lands.
The idea of separating Indians into reservations became very common, especially after the growing conflicts between the white populations and Native Americans. Hence, a new Indian policy was adopted, it was the policy of treaties and reservations. Indeed, the Indian policy of Texas was one of the most hostile ones. First, it must be noted that three basic types of Indian communities were settled in Texas: the tribes of the Hasinai and Caddodacho, “the immigrant tribes of the Cherokee, Kickapoos, Shawnees and Delawares, and the raiding bands of Comanches and Kiowas”. All of these three communities were fervently fought and attacked by Texans. It should be mention that the difficult relation between Indians and Texans did not change a lot after 1845 with Texas union to the American territory, as Native American Indians were continuously attacked by Texans, until they were removed into reservations. Added to this, the situation of Indians in the extreme Northwest was not better than those elsewhere. The latters were intimidated in order to sign treaties and cede their lands. The Indian policy which consisted on the system of reservations was also popularized in California. Under the terms of the Guadalupe Hidalgo treaty signed in 1848, the state was meant to protect native people. Nonetheless, the government failed to live up these terms, as Jacquin asserted, “Mais le Congrès semble ignorer les clauses du traité” (p.67, l.18-19).
Several brutal and violent confrontations occurred between the whitepopulation and Native American Indians. Added to this, Indians were also victims of many diseases and racial prejudices. Faced to such a difficult situation, the government chose to gather the Indians of California into reservations. One should also shed light on the fact that European-American settlers used many exploitative and illegal means of eradicating the Native American Indians from their lands. For instance, in 1850, the American settlers aimed to build a transcontinental. They did so, with the development of railroads, as the “Oregon Trail” and many others, however Jacquin claimed in his book that “Pawnees sont aussi mécontents de l’Oregon Trail qui traverse leur territoire, le bétail des immigrants détruisants leur champs”. This discontentment was dur to several reasons, but especially because American settlers were using immoral ways in order to compel Indians to cede their lands. For instance, the white population employed men to slaughter as many buffalo as possible, knowing that Sioux tribes depended upon the buffalo for their livelihoods, and would therefore either starve to death or retreat. On the same grounds, white settlers exploited the fact that the native people had no resistance to European diseases, such as measles and tuberculosis and transmitted these viruses to Indians.
In order to put an end to the inter-tribal clashes, the United-States decided to follow a new instruction or strategy with Indians.
Therefore, the American government produced the Fort Laramie treaty in 1851. In this, the government promised to give Indians 50 000$ a year for 10 years, if they didn’t attack the travellers going through their land. Fort Laramie treaty forced many tribes to share the same land. This was called the policy of concentration. However, these kinds of treaties turned to be against the interest of the American government, as tribes worked together. However, the peaceful ambiance did not maintain for so long, as inter-tribal clashes appeared again, especially after the discovery of gold between 1858 and 1862. Hence, the federal government found the reservation policy as the only choice but also the better solution for
Indians.
As gold was discovered in Montana in 1862, Gold miners flooded along the Bozeman trail that run through the Sioux country. This would led to conflicts, as it disturbed the Indians’ peace.
At Bluff Creek, the US government peace commission and the Indian chiefs agreed to lay down their arms and give up Sand Creek, in return for money and land in Oklahoma. Equally enough, in 1864, tensions started to rise between the American soldiers and Indians. Hence, forts were built along the Bozeman trail, and a brutal war was launched by Colonel Chivington, who murdered a Cheyenne tribe at Sand Creek, despite the fact that they were within reservation. This would lead to more conflicts and clashes, under the pretext that they weren’t even safe in reservations. It is vital also to mention the treaty of Fort Lyon signed in 1961, in which the US agreed to give reservations to Indians along the Oregon Trail, if they stopped attacking the whites and made and they abandoned the lands given to them in Fort Laramie treaty.
In March 1867, and after several clashes with Indians, the United-States decided to bring an end to the policy of concentration, therefore they introduced a policy of smaller reservations. The government decided to introduce this new policy because they didn’t want the Indians to work together, as it would endanger the whites’ benefits, but also because they needed more lands in order to expand. In conformity to this new policy, the tribes were split up into smaller groups whose foods were ensured by the government. However, this new strategy did not benefitted all tribes, as some of them found nowhere to hunt the buffalo, especially after reducing their reservations.
After the Civil War, in 1869, President Grant brought in a new peace policy, where Indians would be given the chance to live like white people (to go to school and to farm). However the latter were sceptical about Grant’s intentions, which seemed to be ambiguous as Jacquin asserted in his work. Indeed, Indians thought that this new policy was considered a kind of attack on their culture, notably that it contradicted their beliefs about the holy relationship with the land. Added to this, the Native American Indians’ lifestyle depended on hunting and they did never farm. Hence, in order to contain conflicts, generals Sheridan, Sherman and Custer led a campaign in 1868 in order to enforce the removal of all Indians into small reservations.
Indeed, the period after the Civil War was considered as a turning point in the Indian policy of the US, as the American government was drained of resources but also uncertain about continuing war with Indian nations. Hence, following the lengthy battle between the North and the South, the US signed the treaty of 1868 with the Lakota Indians, granting them some lands. However, when gold was discovered in the Black Hills of South Dakota. American troops severed the peace treaty and invaded the sacred Indians’ territory. In 1874, General George Custer led an exploring expedition of gold seekers into the Sioux (Lakota), hunting grounds despite the promises given that the militia would keep them out. A battle with the Indians resulted in the death of Custer and other American soldiers. Nonetheless, the Indians’ victory was only of a short term, as the army regained the offensive, and the Sioux were coerced into surrendering their hunting grounds and the gold fields in exchange for payment. A generation of Indian wars ended in 1886.
Despite the antagonistic and highly exploitive approach of frontiersmen towards the Indian nations, Eastern citizens were increasingly expressing a more humanitarian view towards Indians under the pretext that the latters were subject to many injustice. As a result of such opinions, Indian policy gradually became more humane.
The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 attempted to introduce the Native Americans to individual ownership and agriculture, as Jacquin told us in his work. This was done by allowing the president to divide the lands of any tribe and allocate acres to every head of family. Moreover, an increasing number of reformers sought to assimilate or “Americanise” the indian people by treating them as a homogeneous mass, rather than as diverse and sophisticated tribes, who should be “civilised” into accepting American Christian values. Their aim was the complete assimilation of Indians into mainstream American society. As it was the case of Carl Schurz, many others thought that the only alternative to extermination available to the Indians, was civilisation. However, Schurz was convinced of the superior status of Christian civilisation, so he rejected the idea of allowing the Native Americans the rights and privileges of American citizenship.
Finally, Jacquin’s book “La politique indienne des Etats-Unis (1830-1890)” is a well written book that offers a general view on the Indians’ relation with the united-States during the nineteenth century. Something that was not really surprising, as Philippe Jacquin was known for being an expert in Native American societies. He did fervently advocate the Indian cause by spreading the Native American Indians’ history but also his open and free thoughts, through his works. His book was not limited to a specific public, but it was addressed to every researcher, student or simply any person interested in the Native American’s history.
Throughout Jacquin’s papers, one could notice how the American policy was wholly exploitative, serving to legitimise a system of mass genocide, unconstitutionally attacking the personal liberties of the original inhabitants of the American lands and stripping them out of it. From the early colonial period, the European settlers exploited the aboriginal people, attempting to enslave them and attacking their villages and property. The white occupants failed to see these native people as belonging to a multiplicity of nations, each with its own language, religion and customs, perceiving the natives to be “primitive savages” who must be treated with inferiority. The frontiersmen saw Indians as an obstacle in achieving the American Dream of agricultural prosperity and expansion. They did even use the justification that Indians had made no use of their lands, in order to eradicate them. The absolute approach taken by president Jackson, to remove the Indian population was accompanied by massacres, broken promises and illegal means of coercion through blackmail, the deliberate spread of European diseases, but also the extinction of their major source of food, the buffalo.
Therefore, greediness and the desire to acquire more lands, especially that the white population was mostly composed of farmers, were the main reasons for conflict between the Whites and the Native American Indians. By the late 1870, there were many more whites in America than native people. During this period, the US government did also adopt a more humane approach to American Indian policy. This was manifested through the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887, which attempted to introduce the Native Americans to individual land ownership and agriculture. Although, the intentions of Christian reformers were altruistic and benevolent, their conformist and patronising policy served to dehumanise the Native people and strip them of their personal dignity and identity to the same extent, as the hard-line policy implemented by the American government.
REFERENCES:
1- George B. Tindall & David E. Shi, America, WW. Norton & Company, Inc, 1989.
2- David Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
3- Rachel Kranz, Straight Talk About Prejudice, Facts on File, Inc., 1992.
4- Francis Paul Prycha, Americanising the American Indians, University of Nebraska Press, 1973.
5- Edmund Jefferson Danzinger, Jr. United States Indian Policy During the Late Nineteenth Century: Change And Continuity. http://www.rbhayes.org/hayes/content/files/hayes_historical_journal/usindianpolicyhhj.htm
6- David L. Ghere, Jan F. Spreeman, US Indian Policy, 1815-1860: Removal To Reservations. http://www.learner.org/courses/amerhistory/pdf/USIndianPolicy_LOne.pdf
7- Native American During the 19th Century. http://hubpages.com/hub/Native-Americans-During-The-19th-Century
8- The American Indians (19th - 20th century). http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?groupid=1099&HistoryID=ab05>rack=pthc
9- Robert V. Hine & John Mack Faracher. The American West, A New Interpretive History.