The Board of Indian Commissioners was a committee that advised the United States federal government on Native American policy. The committee also had the purpose to inspect the supplies that were delivered to Indian reservations to ensure that the government fulfilled the treat obligations to tribes. The committee was established by congress on April 10th, 1869, and authorized the President of the United States to organize a board of ten or less people to oversee all aspect of Native American policy. President Ulysses S. Grant wanted to come up with a new policy, which would be more humane, with Native American tribes. The policy would be known as the Peace Policy, which aimed to be free of political corruption. This policy was prominent on …show more content…
What should the Indian become?” For over a century at this point, the Americans are still trying to ponder the question and control the life of the different Native American tribe. Interestingly, the board does not call out specific tribes, rather, generalizing all the tribes at the time into one category. As mentioned in class, the United States recognized five tribes as “civilized”. The tribes that the United States specially mentioned were: the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and the Seminole. Again, the United States government contradicts itself in regards to Indian policy. Since the colonial period, Americans tried to “civilize” all different types of Indian tribes. Fast forward a hundred years, after recognizing these five tribes as civilized, the American government is still trying to control the “destiny” of Indian tribes. The “destiny” that the Board of Indain Commissioners decides is that the Indians should become a citizen of the United States. It seems that the American government could never be satisfied with the policy in which was set before …show more content…
The two items which are defined in the document are “(1) The tribal organization. (2) The Indian reservation.” For one, the United States government set up the Indian reservations, creating poor living conditions that would hinder the ability to progress at the rate that the Untied States formulated for them. The soil, for instance, in Oklahoma, where most of the reservations were at during this time, were awful for farming. Therefore, the Indians would starve and be in ill health. Again, the United States contradicted itself in regards to Indian policy, by choosing to ignore the most crucial parts of history that led to the poor conditions of the
The generalization that, “The decision of the Jackson administration to remove the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River in the 1830s was more a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790s than a change in that policy,” is valid. Ever since the American people arrived at the New World they have continually driven the Native Americans out of their native lands. Many people wanted to contribute to this removal of the Cherokees and their society. Knox proposed a “civilization” of the Indians. President Monroe continued Knox’s plan by developing ways to rid of the Indians, claiming it would be beneficial to all. Andrew Jackson ultimately fulfilled the plan. First of all, the map [Document A] indicates the relationship between time, land, and policies, which affected the Indians. The Indian Tribes have been forced to give up their land as early as the 1720s. Between the years of 1721 and 1785, the Colonial and Confederation treaties forced the Indians to give up huge portions of their land. During Washington's, Monroe's, and Jefferson's administration, more and more Indian land was being commandeered by the colonists. The Washington administration signed the Treaty of Holston and other supplements between the time periods of 1791 until 1798 that made the Native Americans give up more of their homeland land. The administrations during the 1790's to the 1830's had gradually acquired more and more land from the Cherokee Indians. Jackson followed that precedent by the acquisition of more Cherokee lands. In later years, those speaking on behalf of the United States government believed that teaching the Indians how to live a more civilized life would only benefit them. Rather than only thinking of benefiting the Indians, we were also trying to benefit ourselves. We were looking to acquire the Indians’ land. In a letter to George Washington, Knox says we should first is to destroy the Indians with an army, and the second is to make peace with them. The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 began to put Knox’s plan into effect. The federal government’s promise of supplying the Indians with animals, agricultural tool...
In May 1830, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act which forced Native American tribes to move west. Some Indians left swiftly, while others were forced to to leave by the United States Army. Some were even taken away in chains. Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, strongly reinforced this act. In the Second State of the Union Address, Jackson advocated his Indian Policy. There was controversy as to whether the removal of the Native Americans was justified under the administration of President Andrew Jackson. In my personal opinion, as a Native American, the removal of the tribes was not in any way justified.
First, the American government made reservations to separate American settlers and Native Americans in an effort to acquire more land from the Indians and hopefully try to stop conflict. Unfortunately for the Native Americans by the late 1800’s settlers were
American Indians shaped their critique of modern America through their exposure to and experience with “civilized,” non-Indian American people. Because these Euro-Americans considered traditional Indian lifestyle savage, they sought to assimilate the Indians into their civilized culture. With the increase in industrialization, transportation systems, and the desire for valuable resources (such as coal, gold, etc.) on Indian-occupied land, modern Americans had an excuse for “the advancement of the human race” (9). Euro-Americans moved Indians onto reservations, controlled their education and practice of religion, depleted their land, and erased many of their freedoms. The national result of this “conquest of Indian communities” was a steady decrease of Indian populations and drastic increase in non-Indian populations during the nineteenth century (9). It is natural that many American Indians felt fearful that their culture and people were slowly vanishing. Modern America to American Indians meant the destruction of their cultural pride and demise of their way of life.
The governmental leaders of the United States of America began implementing Indian policies from its inception. As Euro-Americans they expected all non-whites in the U.S. to assimilate into a Euro-American (Christian) lifestyle, without reciprocation or sympathy to the traditions and history of our native people. Our founding fathers and subsequent leaders of the United States at varying times have used suppression, segregation, aggression, and assimilation to manage what they perceived as an Indian problem, and civilize them. The native peoples of North America have responded to these actions by, at times, complying with the U.S. government and allowing themselves to be relocated to other areas of the country leaving behind their ancestral
The American Indians were promised change with the American Indian policy, but as time went on no change was seen. “Indian reform” was easy to promise, but it was not an easy promise to keep as many white people were threatened by Indians being given these rights. The Indian people wanted freedom and it was not being given to them. Arthur C. Parker even went as far as to indict the government for its actions. He brought the charges of: robbing a race of men of their intellectual life, of social organization, of native freedom, of economic independence, of moral standards and racial ideals, of his good name, and of definite civic status (Hoxie 97). These are essentially what the American peoples did to the natives, their whole lives and way of life was taken away,
On February 8, 1887, the United States Congress decided to pass the Dawes Act also known as the General Allotment Act. The Dawes Act was named after its writer Senator Henry Dawes of Massachusetts. The congressmen who sought to pass and enforce the Dawes Act aimed at pushing the Native Americans into assimilation at a high pace. The reformers of the act also expected Native Americans owning private property to build a foundation on which the natives could support themselves and their families (Stremlau, 265). The Act allowed the President of the United States to break up Indian reservation land into 160 acre allotments, and divide it out among each individual Native American. The Dawes Act Stated, “To each head of a family, one-quarter of a section; To each single person over eighteen years of age, one-eighth of a section; To each orphan child under eighteen years of age, one-eighth of a section; and to each other single person under eighteen years now living, or who may be born prior to the date of the order of the President directing an allotment of the lands embraced in any reservation, one-sixteenth of a section…” (PBS-Archive of the West). The act also determined which tribal lands were too allotted. Tribes such as the Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, and many mo...
Native American Relations During the numerous years of colonization, the relationship between the English settlers and the Native Americans of the area was usually the same. Native Americans would initially consider the settlers to be allies, then as time passed, they would be engaged in wars with them in a struggle for control of the land. This process of friendship to enemies seemed to be the basic pattern in the majority of the colonies. When the English landed in Jamestown in 1607, the dominant tribe of the area was the Powhatan (which the English settlers named after the leader of the tribe, Powhatan).
Pages one to sixty- nine in Indian From The Inside: Native American Philosophy and Cultural Renewal by Dennis McPherson and J. Douglas Rabb, provides the beginning of an in-depth analysis of Native American cultural philosophy. It also states the ways in which western perspective has played a role in our understanding of Native American culture and similarities between Western culture and Native American culture. The section of reading can be divided into three lenses. The first section focus is on the theoretical understanding of self in respect to the space around us. The second section provides a historical background into the relationship between Native Americans and British colonial power. The last section focus is on the affiliation of otherworldliness that exist between
In 1887 the federal government launched boarding schools designed to remove young Indians from their homes and families in reservations and Richard Pratt –the leader of Carlisle Indian School –declared, “citizenize” them. Richard Pratt’s “Kill the Indian… and save the man” was a speech to a group of reformers in 1892 describing the vices of reservations and the virtues of schooling that would bring young Native Americans into the mainstream of American society.
Prior to the 1830’s, the United States government did not make it’s aspirations of attaining Indian lands, but rather Indians were given rights to be treated as nations, and protected their rights according to the Constitution. According to the letter to President George Washington from Henry Knox, “The Indians being the prior occupants, possess the right of the soil. It cannot be taken from them unless by their free consent, or by the right of conquest in case of a just war” (Doc B). To add on, the United States believed that “intrusions upon the lands of the friendly Indian tribes, is not only a violation of law, but in direct opposition to the policy for the government towards its savage neighbor” (Doc G) was considerate of the Indians’ territories. Therefore, this indicates that the government of the United States did not want to take any risk and was rather cautious against having the desire to obtain the Natives’ land.
In 1787 the United States Constitution Article 1 section 8 established a federally mandated relationship between the government and the people of Indian Nations in regards to commerce. Although this agreement and many treaties subsequently thereafter were disregarded on the part of the United States (Smith, 2002), it established an official responsibility between the two nations. In 1921 the Snyder Act, which established authorization for the federal government to provide basic healthcare for members of federally recognized United States Indian tribes, was passed (Wallechinsky, 2010).
Sandefur, G. (n.d.). American Indian reservations: The first underclass areas? Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc121f.pdf
Contrary to popular belief, discrimination of Native Americans in America still widely exist in the 21st century! So you may ask, why? Well, to answer that one question, I will give you 3 of the countless reasons why this unfortunate group of people are punished so harshly for little good reason. So now, let’s get into it, shall we!
In regard to law, Deloria defines the relationship between the US Government and the Indians as paternalistic. The US Government treated and governed the Indians as a father would by providing basic needs but without given them rights. There has been some improvement with the Indian Reorganization Act in 1934. This act allowed the return to local self-government on a tribal level and restored the self management of their assets. By allowing the Indians to self govern it encouraged an economic foundation for the inhabitants of Indian reservations. Unfortunately only a few tribes have fully taken advantage of this act, while others continue to struggle for survival.