Free Inquiry in Creative Sodofogy Volume 26 No. I, May /998 Page 71

WAGING THE CONTEST BETWEEN "SAVAGERY" AND "CIVILIZATION": AN EXAMINATION OF THE TENSION BETWEEN ACCULTURATION AND REMOVAL AT THE BRAZOS RESERVATION, 1855-1859

Kelly F. Himmel, University of -Pan American ABSTRACT The developmentofthe reservation system between 1849 and the Civil War represents atransition in US Indian policy from removal to acculturation. This case study examines the two conflicting and basically incompatible underpinnings ofthe reservation system: removal (isolation)from the dominant group coupled with a program designed to acculturate Indians tothe norms and values ofthe dominant group. Despitethe efforts made by Indians on the Brazos Reservation in Texas to cooperate with the United States government's acculturation program, the reservation was destroyed by white settlers who refused to allow the Indians to live in their midst. The settlers destroyed the reservation even though itwas to theireconomic benefitto keep it open. Thus, the article increases our understanding ofthe poorly-known formative years of the reservation system as well as the contradictions inherent in an institution thatwasdesigned both to isolate aminority group and acculturate itto the norms and values ofthe majoritygroup.

INTRODUCTION Takaki 1979). Previous studies of the Indian reservation However, the westward expansion of the system in the United States have most fre­ Angio-American frontier of settlement proved quently focused on the post-Civil War period to be much faster than expected, and the and its assimilation policy (Fritz 1963, Hoxie Native American response proved to be less 1984, Trennert 1988). However, the devel­ tractabie than expected. By the 1830s, forced opment of the reservation system between removal of American Indians east of the Mis­ 1849 and the Civil War remains poorly un­ sissippi became official policy. By the 1840s, derstood (Prucha 1984; Trennert 1975; Wishart the discourse of savagery versus civilization 1994). Yet, this period allows one to focus on began to result in the call for extermination or the tensions engendered by the transition from civilization for Indians by many Anglo-Ameri­ an Indian policy emphasizing removal to one cans (Horsman 1981), though the humanitar­ emphasizing acculturation and eventual as­ ian, reformist bent continued to structure offi­ similation. Exploring this tension between re­ ciai Indian policy in the United States (Prucha moval and acculturation during the formative 1981). As such, the Indian reservations in the years of the reservation period allows one to pre-Civil War United States, while rooted in a better understand the enigma posed by the genuine humanitarian concern for the welfare existence of the reservations-physical and ofAmerican Indians (Prucha 1981), also were social spaces in which American Indians were influenced by the greater discourse of the both separated from the dominant group and contest between savagery and civilization that encouraged to conform to the norms and the West used to frame its imperial expansion values of the dominant 9rouP. and conquest of non-Western people. In the first years of the nation, an intense Thus, this case study of the Brazos Res­ debate arose overthefateofthenew republic's ervation between 1855 and 1859 goes beyond American Indian inhabitants. The intellectual illuminating a relatively obscure aspect of and political elite of the United States realized American Indian-white relations. Rather, it that Indians held lands that the European uses historical data, from both secondary origin people ofthe United States needed and sources and primary sources, to focus on a would eventually claim. Although Indians ex­ neglected problem in American social sci­ isted in "savagery," the Enlightenment belief ence: the development of the Indian reser­ in the perfectibility of humankind led them to vation as a place where an ethnic minority hope that they could be "civilized" by their could be both isolated from the dominant contact with the European world. As a result, group and encouraged to emulate the norms they would disappear as Indians. Of course, and values of that group. The Brazos Res­ they could withdraw westward beyond the ervation is particularly well-suited for exami­ frontier ofEuropean settlement or die out from nation because it was, in the words of Francis disease and other natural causes as Anglo­ Paul Prucha (1984), "strikingly ineffective." American society and "civilization" approached (Berkhofer 1978; Prucha 1981; Sheehan 1973; 72 Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Free InqUiry in Creative SOCiology

THE CREATION OF THE BRAZOS with the United States, its citizens, and other RESERVATION Indians who live at peace with the United With the annexation of Texas in 1846, the States. In return, the American Indian nations American Indians in the new state became the were to receive additional "presents in responsibility of the United States govern­ goods... to the amount of $10,000" and the ment. In the twenty five years prior to the "benefits" of blacksmiths, school teachers. acquisition ofTexasthe diverse native peoples and "preachers of the gospel" who might be ofTexas (Newcomb 1961) had been caught in sent to them "at the discretion of the President a complex three-way conflict between Anglo­ ofthe United States" (Winfrey, Day 1966). The American settlers, Mexico, and the Indians of western Texas received no guar­ (Fehrenbach 1968; Reichstein 1989). In addi­ antees that would prevent settlers from taking tion, new Indian groups entered Texas from their lands. the United States during this period as a result After the conquest of Mexico in the War of ofthe westward expansion ofAnglo-American 1846-1848 secured United States control over settlement and Jackson's policy of Indian re­ Texas and the Southwest, federal policy aimed moval. By 1846, some groups present in 1821, to 1) prevent raids into Mexico as required by such as the Karankawas ofthe GulfCoast, had the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 2) protect been virtually exterminated by Anglo-Ameri­ travelers and trade between Texas and Cali­ can settler violence (Gatschet 1891; Himmel fornia, and 3) secure the property of the set­ 1995). Others, such as the Bidais of east tlers (Trennert 1977). To achieve these goals, central Texas, survived as only a few scattered the United States established a chain of mili­ individuals after being decimated by diseases tary posts on the border with Mexico; another introduced by the settlers (Sjoberg 1951). The line of forts extended along the frontier of non-agricultural and Lipans sought settlement. In addition, the military located refuge along the southwestern frontier ofAnglo­ other forts beyond the frontier of settlement to American settlement (Himmel 1995; Schilz protect travelers and traders on the two main 1987; Sjoberg 1953a, 1953b). Remnants of routes to California. the , , and Wichita confedera­ By 1850, increased travel across the south­ cies (, Anadarkos, lonis, Keechis, ern plains, a growing demand for meat and , and WaeDs) retreated to the west­ hides, and introduced bovine diseases had ern edge of Anglo-American settlement in begun to severely impact the bison herds north Texas. There, they attempted to rebuild (Flores 1991). The decline in the game coin­ their agricultural and trading economies cided with an increased demand forcaptives in (Newkumet, Meredith 1988; Smith 1995). In and for horses throughout the east Texas, only the small immigrant Ala­ southern plains. This led to an increase in bama- tribe remained after Repub­ raiding activities in MeXico, Texas, and the lie ofTexas President Lamar's wars directed at Southwest by , Comanches and their immigrant Indians in 1839 (Rothe 1963). Far­ allies, and newcomers from the east (Hall ther west, well beyond the line of settlement, 1989). Mixed ethnicity outlaw gan9s that had the Comanches maintained considerable earlier been found largely between the Nueces power. However, the southern "division" ofthe and the Rio Grande spread westward (Olmsted Comanches, the Penatekas, who occupied 1978). central Texas, had come under considerable The push of settlement forced the Caddos, pressure from Anglo-American settlers (Fos­ (Anadarkos and lonis), Keechis, ter 1991; Schilz, Schilz 1989). Lipans, Penateka Comanches, Tonkawas, and Initially, the United States concluded a Wichitas \'Nacos and Tawakonis) farther and treaty at the Council Springs, near present-day farther west. For the agriculturists, it became Waco, on 15 May 1846, with representatives impossible to remain in one place long enough of the Anadarkos, Caddos, lonis, Keechis, to raise a crop, and starvation stalked the Lipans, Penateka Comanches, Tawakonis, children and the aged (Neighbours 1973), and, Tonkawas, Wacos, and Wichitas. By the terms in Texas, dryland farming, as practiced by the of the treaty, the Indians placed themselves Caddos, Hasinais, and Wichitas, becomes under the protection of the United States and increasingly risky \'Nebb 1936). For ali, un­ promised to trade only with traders licensed by familiar hunting territories; competition with the United States; to give up prisoners, crimi­ outlaws, settlers, soldiers, and travelers forthe nals, and stolen property; and to live in peace declining game; and exposure to violence and Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Page 73

disease shattered traditional cultures. The remains but to wage war with all our might and entire area from well below the Rio Grande to carry it into the wigwams and villages of our the Arkansas River, along and west of the line barbarous foe." Yet. more moderate voices of settlement, became a haven for lawless­ presented the state and the federal govern­ ness centered around the stealing of captives ments with a choice. Former Provisional Presi­ and horses (Neighbours 1973). dent ofthe Republic olTexas, David G. Burnet The creation of a coherent and workable (1849), who had lived among the Comanches Indian policy in Texas faced additional road­ as a young man, wrote to Neighbors on 20 blocks. The state owned the public lands and August 1847. He called for the removal of the supported the settlers who saw Indians as Indians from Texas by the United States as nuisances and obstacles to the settlement of "the only practical substitute for the actual these lands. Thus, the United States could not extermination of the Indians." guarantee title to American Indians for lands in The reappointment ofNeighbors as Special Texas (Trennert 1975). Finally, the military Indian Agent for Texas, following the election tactics used to deal with the massive outlawry of as President in 1852, al­ on the Texas frontier further contributed to the lowed him to pursue his agenda ofestablishing problem. The military responded with punitive reservations for the American Indian people of expeditions against the first Indians found the western frontier of Texas. A pragmatic (Schilz 1987) and theytook no prisoners (Smith concern over the persistent violence and a 1992) humanitarian concern over the welfare of the On 20 March 1847, the United States ap­ "remnant tribes" coalesced. In February 1854, pointed Robert Neighbors, who had been the the legislature authorized the creation of res­ Indian Agent for the Lipans ervations from state-owned lands to be placed and Tonkawas, as Special Indian Agent for under federal control, with the stipUlation that Texas. After his survey of conditions of the non-native Indians be removed from Texas Texas Indians, Neighbors recommended the and the reservation lands would revert to the creation ofreselVations, underfederal control, state iforwhen the Indians no longer occupied forthem. On the reservations, Neighbors hoped the reselVations. the federal government would provide carpen­ However, it was to be more than a year ters, blacksmiths, farmers, and teachers to before Neighbors and his agents could gather instructthe Indians and furnish livestock, tools, the scattered "remnant tribes" on the Brazos seeds, utensils, clothes, and food until they ReselVation, located on the Brazos River, became self-sustaining (Neighbours 1973). below Ft. Belknap, in Young County, Texas, Neighbors learned upon his arrival in Wash­ about ninety mileswest-northwest of Ft. Worth. ington in August 1849, to present his plan, that The 30 June 1855 Census Roll conducted by the change of administration following the Special Indian Agent, G. W. Hill (Indian Office election of Zachary Taylor had cost him his Letters Received, Texas) showed 623 Indians job. No longer Special Indian Agent forTexas, on the Brazos Reservation. The agency per­ Neighbors returned to Texas and found a large sonnel settled them into five ethnic group­ body of Indians awaiting his arrival on the ings-Anadarkos, Caddos, Tawacearos (Tawa­ Clear Fork of the Brazos. They were eager to konis), Tonkawas, and Wacos. On 30 August "learn of the wishes and intentions of the 1855, at the Brazos Agency, representatives Department in relation to their affairs" and of the five "tribes" on the Brazos Reservation were disappointed that Neighbors was no and 's Penateka Comanches longertheir official intermediary with the United from the nearby Clear Fork Reservation signed States (Neighbours 1973). an amendment to the Treaty of 15 May 1846. For the next four years, United States In­ They agreed to dian policy in Texas floundered as the United States Army pursued its "'no prisoner" policy abandon forever a roving and hunting life toward Indians suspected of raiding. Without and., .settle down permanently on the lands any decrease in the raids, settlers bombarded selected for uS ... and to devote all of our en­ the state government with complaints of "in­ ergiestothe cultivation ofthe Soil andto raising dian depredations" and demands for action. stock as a means ofsUbsistence for ourselves For example, accusations that appeared in the and families. (Indian Office Letters Received, Austin State Gazette on 8 September 1849, Texas) included the call that "no other alternative 74 Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology

In addition, they placed themselves under the be distinguished from the domesticated Indians authority of the Indian agents at the Brazos from his lank and lean appearance. (Dallas and Clear Fork Reservations and "chiefs" ap. Herald 1856) pointed by those agents. In return, the United States agreed: On 4 October 1856, the Dallas Herald en­ thusiastically commented; .. .to protect and maintain all the members ofthe Tribes ... in their lives and property against injury Thedomestication, civilizing, and evangelizing and molestation from citizens of the United thewiJd Indians ofTexas... will constitute a not States while on said Reservation, ... [to provide unimportant evidence of progress and onward ]farmers to assist and instruct them ... a Black­ march of the age of humanity and religion. smith and tools, ... stock cattle and otherdornes­ (Dallas Herald 1856) tic animals, ... and to furnish them regularlywith rations ... to enable them to supporttheirfami­ In the fall of 1857, one of the farmers em­ lies, until they can subsist themselves by their ployed to aid the Reserve Indians, Samuel own exertions; and the General Government is Church, supplied the following account of the hereby pledged to pursue that course of policy year's harvest to Indian Agent Shapley Ross at with the settlers on these reservations, deemed the Brazos Agency; best calculated to advance them as a self­ sustaining people. (IOLR, Texas) They have also a very large crop of peas and beans, an abundance of pumpkins and At last, many ofthe surviving Indian people of squashes, which they are now engaged in cut­ Texas, in the face ofextermination by violence ting and drying fortheirwinter use. They also or starvation, relinquished their freedom and raised alarge crop of melons....Theirstock look accepted the "fruits of civilization" offered by verywell, and theirwomen milk cows and make the United States. butter for their own use ....A number of these With the creation ofthe reservation system, Indians have purchased themselves hogs and any Native American offthe reservations with­ are endeavoring to follow in the footsteps ofthe out a pass became a "hostile", subject to the white men, and areeconomicalwith theircrops; military's "no prisoner" policy and to settler and it is believed thattheywill make breadstuffs violence (Klos 1994). Those who chose to live enough for their subsistence for the coming on the reservation and become stock farmers year. (Ross to Neighbors, 31/10/1856, IOLR. remembered the next three years as a cycle of Texas) crop failures due to drought and grasshoppers (Newkumet, Meredith 1988). However, the In addition, the Reserve Indians harvested government rations and protection from set­ 8,000 bushels of corn and 1,240 bushels of tlers, outlaws, and American Indian enemies wheat in the summer and fall of 1857 (Neigh­ gave them security and the means for survival. bors to Denver, 16/9/1857, 10LR, Texas). The folloWing year, the government es­ THE ACCULTURATION PROJECT AT THE tablished a school on the Brazos Reservation. BRAZOS RESERVATION The teacher, Zachariah Coombes, was so Visitors to the Brazos Reservation came proud of his charges that he took two of his away enthusiastic about the "progress" being students to Dallas for display. According to the made by the Reserve Indians. They tended Herald: fields, gardens, and stock; built "American­ style" houses; and went to church and school. The little red·skins learn more readily and more The Reserve Indians even planted 800 peach rapidly than one would have supposed, and are trees given to them by a former Indian agent altogethertractable and manageable. (12/15/ (Ross to Neighbors, 1/1/1856, 10LR, Texas). 58) On 15 August 1856, Colonel Middleton T. Johnson, reported to the Dallas Herald: The Reserve Indians seemed to be rapidly making the transition from "savagery to civi­ ... the feeding policy of Uncle Sam is suc­ lization." ceeding admirably.... The Indians in the res­ Yet, some of the Reserve Indians resisted ervations are becoming sleek and fat, and it is the demands of "progress" and "the onward said that the wild Indians from the prairies can march of humanity and religion" more than Free Inquiry in Creative Sodology Volume 26 No. I, May 1998 Page 75 others. In his diary, Zachariah Coombes per­ residents of the frontier. By 1858, public opin­ sistently complained of drinking, gambling, ion demanded that Governor Runnels ofTexas and immorality on the reservation by both the call up a company of Rangers to defend the Reserve Indians and the white staff. frontier settlements. The Ranger company, commanded by Captain John S. (Rip) Ford, To civilize asavage requires afirm and decisive accompanied by a number of men from the course .... [However] it seems to me thatto eat, Brazos Reservation, traveled across the Red to sleep, to drink and be merry, also to race, River and attacked a large camp. gamble and cheat are the most striking and in Despite the decisive victory of the Anglo­ fact are the examples which are daily and hourly Texans, the raiding continued on the frontier of set before them. And in addition to all this there northwestTexas (Klos 1994; McConnell 1933; are continually among the Indians a most de­ Neighbours 1973). graded set of libertines who make it aboast that However, in the aftermath of the service there is not nor has been any Indian female on rendered by the Indian men from the Brazos this Reserve with whom they have not had or Reservation, pUblic opinion toward the Re­ may not have illicet[sic] intercourse, precisely at serve Indians softened. The Dallas Herald(241 their own will and pleasure. (1962) 7/58) reported that on 26 May 1858, Gov. Runnels stated that the "brave Indian allies... In particular, theTonkawas, who were hunt­ will be held in grateful remembrance by the ers and gatherers ratherthan farmers and who people of Texas." The same issue of the had a reputation among other Indians of the Herald contained a reprint ofan article that had southern plains as vicious and depraved can­ appeared earlier in the Austin State Gazette nibals (Foreman 1968), seemed to resist the urging the state to reward Placido, a advances of "civilization." They frequently dis­ leaderwho had served Texas militarily for over rupted the planned activities of the staff twenty years, with "a present of a small num­ (Coombes 1962). Ford recounted an incident ber of cows" for his invaluable service to the in which the other Indians of the Brazos Res­ state: ervation accused the Tonkawas of interfering with their rainmaking ceremonies: He is faithful and industrious.... He has done much by his example and by his conversation to The infernal Tonks, always bent on mischief, encourage his countrymen to abandon theirwild had stronger medicine than his [the rain king] pursuits of the chase, and follow those of civi­ and turned the cloud away. The Tonks were the lized life, and he has had, and continuesto have black beasts of the agency and were made much to contend againstin the indolence and responsible for many such happenings. (1963) improvidence of the Indian character. (Dallas Herafd24/7/58) in addition, Webb (1965) noted that they were disinclined to farm or garden, attend church, Although men from the Brazos Reservation send their children to school, or live in houses followed the young Sui Ross, son of Shapley because Utheir religion forbade it." Ross, on a second expedition, commanded by Major Van Dorn of the United States Army THE DESTRUCTION OF THE BRAZOS against the Comanches in the fall of 1858, the RESERVATION "grateful remembrance" did not long persist However, the ciVilizing project atthe Brazos on the northwestTexas frontier. On 23 Decem­ Reservation came to an early end in conflict ber 1858, at least six white settlers, led by with that deep-rooted altitude toward Native Peter Garland, attacked a hunting party of In­ Americans-Indian-Hating (Drinnan 1980). dian men, women, and children, offthe Brazos Throughout 1857 and 1858, horse stealing Reservation with the permission of the agent. and murder plagued the northwestTexas fron­ They murdered seven peopie, including three tier. The settlers, orchestrated by the recently women, in their sleep. In the ensuing fight, two dismissed Indian Agent at the Clear Fork Indians died, a man and a woman, as did one Reservation, John Baylor, blamed the Re­ of the settlers (U. S. Bureau of Indian Affairs serve Indians for the "depredations." This 1860). occurred despite strong evidence thatthe thefts Afterthe murders on Keechi Creek, the anti­ and murders were the work of the mixed Indian sentiment on the northwestern frontier ethnicity gangs of outlaws that preyed on of Texas flared in anticipation of Indian 76 Volume 26 No. I, May J 998 Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology

reprisals. For example in a letter to a local (USBIA 1860). Earlier, the tensions engen­ newspaper in January of 1859, C.B. Underhill dered by the settler demands of removal and charged the agents and the "rascally reserve the threat ofviolence apparently led the accul­ Indians" of plotting to kill a delegation of turated Reserve Indian, Notchicorax. to kill settlers sent to the reservation to resolve the himself and his family (Coombes 1962). dispute. In addition to the usual complaints of The prospect of armed confiict between the theft, harassment, and murder, Underhill ac­ United States Army and Anglo-Texan settlers cused the "red and white horse thieves" on the over the safety of the Indians on the reserva~ reservation of"debauchery, drunkenness, and tions forced Governor Runnels into action. On abandoned conduct... unfit to be put in print." 6 June 1859, Runnels appointed a board of Finally, playing on settler distrust of and peace commissioners to investigate the vio­ dissatisfaction with the United States govern­ lence (Winfrey, Day 1966). In theirreportto the ment, Underhill decried the government for Governor, the peace commissioners impli­ supplying the Indians with arms, while ne­ cated white accomplices in the raiding, with glecting frontier defense (USBIA 1860). De­ onlya few Reserve Indians involved. Yet, they spite open acknowledgment oftheir actions by recommended removal: the murderers, Major Neighbors could not arrest them or indict them in this climate of We believe it impracticable, if not impossible, hatred (Neighbours 1973). for tribes of American Indians, scarcely ad­ On 5 May 1859, E.J. Gurley, special Coun­ vanced one step in civilization, cooped up on a sel to prosecute the murderers ofthe Reserve small reservation and surrounded bywhite set­ Indians, disclosed to Neighbors a settler piotto tlers, to live in harmony for any length of time. interfere with the possible removal of the Re­ (USSIA 1860) serve Indians to : "They do not intend that they shall escape; but intend to kill Governor Runnels called up 100 state troops them either at the reservation or before they to be commanded by John Henry Brown to get to the Red River' (USBIA 1860). Gurley separate the settlers from the Indians on the also informed Neighbors that the settlers were reservations (Klos 1994; McConnell 1933: planning to exploit the rifts between the Neighbours 1973). Tonkawas and the other groups on the res­ Yet, the fear, hysteria, and anti-Indian rheto­ ervation and use them in their plot for a ric continued, as the following newspaper promise of safety (USBIA 1860). account reveals: John R. Baylor once more came to the fore as the leader of the anti-Indian faction. On 23 We call upon you fellow citizens,ln the name of May 1859, Baylor took 250 mounted settlers all that is sacred, in behalf of suffering women into the Brazos Reservation, with the purpose and children, whose blood paints afresh, from of breaking up the reservation and driving out the Red Riverto the Rio Grande, day byday.lhe its inmates. A detachment ofthe United States scalping knifeofthe savage foe; in the name of Army, commanded by Capt. C.C. Gilbert, met mothers whose daughters have been violated Baylor's vigilantes. Baylor and his men re­ bythe 'reserve Indians.' and robbed ofthatvirtue treated, but they murdered two elderly Re­ which God a/one can give-come,come. fellow serve Indians, including a woman tending her citizens; arouse, and take action before the garden, during their foray (Klos 1994; Me­ deaths oftender infants, mothers, fathers, and Connell 1933; Neighbours 1973). aged grandsires is swollen to a more frightful In the aftermath of Baylor's raid, the people extent by our sluggish acrlon or supine indiffer­ on the reservations were in fear of their lives ence! ("Extra," FrontierNews24/6/59. quoted and unable to hunt, roundup their stock, or in USSIA 1860) farm. Neighbors despaired: "The reserves may be considered virtually broken up, all work is However, a debate emerged. George B. suspended. The Indians will not even cultivate Erath and Middleton T. Johnson, respected their small gardens." With the Native Ameri­ figures on the Anglo-Texan frontier, traveled cans and whites on the reservation confined to tirelessly and without regard to threats to their close quarters in fear of attack, Neighbors personal safety across northwest Texas to found: "many sick, With three or four deaths calm the fears of the settlers (Klos 1994: per day, and the whole camp, both Indians and Neighbours 1973). On 12 May 1859, a large whites seriously threatened with an epidemic" group of settlers in Young County gathered at Free fnquiry in Creative Sociology Volume 26 No. /, May /998 Page 77

the courthouse in Belknap to condemn the makes him sorry to hear that the Texans are violence and urge restraint in the confrontation anxious to murder his little tribe, after they with the Indians on the reservations (Neigh­ fought so hard fartheir country. (Dallas Herald bours 1973). The anti-removal argument had 25/5/59) centered on concerns that Indian removal would leave the frontier defenseless, if United On 11 June 1859, Neighbors received or­ States troops stationed near the reservations ders from Washington to move the Reserve left with their Indian charges (Dallas Herald 3/ Indians across the Red River to the Indian 7/58,17/7/58,19/1/59,9/2/59) Territory. Indian-Hating had triumphed over In addition, the reservations and the troops security, economic, and persisting humanitar­ furnished a substantial economic boon to the ian concerns. Despite the feuding between northwest Texas frontier. For example, in a Neighbors and Brown (Winfrey, Day 1966), singie week, 5 December to 13 December the state militia maintained order. On 1 Au­ 1857, the United States government bought gust, the Reserve Indians loaded their portable 11,400 Ibs. of beef, 500 Ibs. of flour, and 105 personal property into ox-drawn wagons for Ibs of salt at a cost of $570.91 for the use of the trek north. They were escorted by agency 1,010 Indians at the Brazos Agency (State­ personnel and United States Army troops ment of Provisions Issued by S.P. Ross, 10LR, commanded by Major George Thomas. A Texas). The fact that the Brazos and Clear week later, they safely crossed the Red River Fork Reservations and associated military into Indian Territory. posts underpinned local prosperity was not lost on the people of the area. The Dallas DISCUSSION Hera/d (24/7/58, quoted in Neighbours 1973) The rapid westward political and economic noted that land in Belknap has "risen 15G-200 expansion of the United States in the first half per cent, and you can hear nothing now but of the nineteenth century overwhelmed Indian contracts for bUilding houses... Vive la Bel­ peoples beyond the Appalachians. By the late knap... " As late as 9 February 1859, the Dallas 1840s, the government of the United States Herald argued that ifthe United States govern­ and the Anglo-American majority in the United ment removed the Indians on the reservations States faced the question of how to deal with to Indian Territory and closed the associated its beleaguered American Indian minority. In military posts: line with contemporary Western conceptions about savagery and civilization, the choice We lose the farge amount of public funds dis­ wavered between a harsh policy of removal or bursed in maintaining those posts, the money extermination and a more benevolent civiliza­ disbursed bythe IndianAgents In subsisting the tion program. The reservation system in­ Reserve Indians-an amount inthe aggregate augurated by the United States Bureau of that has been sufficient forseveral years past to Indian Affairs, afler 1849, was to be the cor­ furnish a market for surplus produce in the nerstone of the civilization program, while frontiercaunties that could not have been found incorporating elements of the removal pro­ elsewhere, and that has put dollars into every gram by isolating Indians from the dominant man's pocket, who has a bushel of corn, or a group. bale ofoats, a rack ofhayora beeftoselL (Dallas Authorities created the Brazos Reservation Hera/d9/2/59) out of humanitarian concerns that camou­ flaged the massive seizure ofAmerican Indian The pro-Indian argument continued to be lands. The acculturation program atthe Brazos advanced along humanitarian lines as well. Reservation failed miserably. Not only did The Hera/d, on 25 May 1859, described a some Indians, particularly the Tonkawas, re­ recent meeting with Placido: sist acculturation, but white Americans de­ manded and achieved the dismantling of the Placido, the old chief asks, 'Where am Ito take reservation and the removal of its inmates to my little band! No friends, no money, no home, Indian Territory. They did so in the face of no hunting grounds: he says his onlyfriends are compelling security and economic interests Texians and that he does notwish to leave the that supported the continued existence of the country.' It IS painful to hear him talk. he mani­ Brazos Reservation and its acculturation pro­ fests so much feeling, and rarely speaks ofthe gram. matter without shedding tears. He says that it The debacle at the Brazos Reservation 78 Volume 26 No. I, Moy /998 Free Inquiry in Creative Sodo/ogy

points out the inherent incompatibilities in a Klos G 1994 'Ourpeople could not distinguish one tribe program that involves isolation based on race from another': The 1859expulsion ofthe reserve indians from Texas SDuthwestern H 097598-619 hatred and forced acculturation. On the Bra­ McConnell JC 1933 The West Texas Frontier Dr a zos Reservation, mostoftheIndians responded Descriptive History of Early Times in Western to the demands of the acculturation program Texas ... Jacksboro, TX: Gazette Print by farming, going to school, attending church, Neighbours KF 1973 Indian Exodus: Texas Indian Affairs, 1835-1859n.p.: Nortex and adopting customs of the majority group. Newcomb VWV 1961 The Indians of Texas: From Yet, the white settlers refused to accept the Prehistonc to MDdem TimesAustin: U Texas Reserve Indians as anything but "savages," in Newkumet VB, HL Meredith 1988 Hasinai: A Tradi­ spite of the efforts made by most of them to tional History Dfthe Caddo Confederacy College Station: TexasA&M accommodate to the demands that they live in Olmsted FL 1.978 A Journey through Texas, or a the same manner as their settler neighbors Saddle-Tnp on the Southwestern Frontier Austin: and compelling security and economic advan­ UTexas tages for many of the settlers to support the Prucha FP 1981 Indian Policy in the United States: Historical EssaysLincoln: U Nebraska Press continued existence of the Brazos Reserva­ _-.,..= 1984 The Great Father: The United States tion. In addition, even the most ardent and GovernmentandtheArnerican Indians Two VaIs. sincere advocates for a humanitarian accul­ Lincoln: U Nebraska Press turation program opted for Indian removal Reichstein A 1989Rise ofthe LDne Star: The Making ofTexastrans JRWilson. College Station: Texas once the prospects of violence became real A&M U Press with the attack on the Brazos Reservation. Rothe A 1963 Kalila's People: A History of the Ala­ bama-Goushatta People in TexasWaco, TX: Texian REFERENCES Press Austin 1)( State Gazette 1849-1854 Schilz JLD, TF Schilz 1989 Buffalo Hump and the BerkhoferRF Jr1978 The VWlite Man's Indian: Images Penateka Comanches EI Paso: Texas Western Of The American Indian From Columbus To The Press PresentNY:Alfred Knopf Schilz TF 1987 The Lipan Indians in Texas EI Paso: BurnetOG 1849 Letter to Robert Neighbors, AU9ust TexasWestern Press 20, 1847 in United States Bureau of Indian Affairs Sheehan BW 1973 SeedsofExtinctiDn: Jeffersonian (comp.), Communication From The Commissioner Philanthropy and the American Indian Chapel Hill: OfIndian Affairs ... Washington DC: GPO U North Carolina Press CoombesZE 1962 The Diaryofa Frontiersman, 1858­ Sjoberg AF 1951 The Bidai Indians of Southeastern 1859ed BN LedbetterNewcastle, TX: n. p. Texas M.A. thesis U Texas at Austin Dallas TX Herald 1856-1859 _-.=-:=1953aThe culture ofthe Tonkawa, a Texas Drinnan R 1980 Facing West: The Metaphysics of Indian tribe Texas J Science 5 280-304 Indian-Hating andEmpire-BUl1dingMinneapolis: U _-== 1953bLipan culture in the historical Minnesota perspective Southwestern J Amer9 76-98 Fehrenbach TR 1968 Lone Star: A History ofTexBs Smith FT 1995 The Caddo Indians: Tn'bes at the and Texans NY: MacMillan Convergence ofEmpires, 1542-1854College Sta­ Flores 0 1991 Bison ecology and bison diplomacy J tion: TexasA&M U Press AmerH 78 65-485 Smith n 1992 Fort Inge and Texas Frontier Military Ford JS (Rip) 1963 Rip Ford's Texas ed SB Oates Operations, 1846-1869 Southwestern H Offly9S Austin: U Texas 1-25 Foreman G 1968Advancing the Frontier, 1830-1860 Takaki RT 1979 Iron Cages: Race and Culture in Norman: U Oklahoma Nineteenth-Century Amen'ca NY: Alfred A Knopf FosterMW 1991 Being Comanche: ASocialHistoryof Trennert RA. Jr1975Alternative to Extinction: Federal . an American Indian CommunityTucson: UArizona Indian Policyand the Beginnings ofthe Reservation Fntz HE 1963 The MovementforlndianAssimilatiDn, System, 1846-1851Philadelphia: Temple U Press 186D-1890Phiiadelphia: U Pennsylvania _....,,= 1988 The Phoenix Indian School: Forced GatschetAS 1891 The Karankawa Indians. The CDast Assimilation in Arizona, 1891-1935 Norman: U People Df Texas Cambridge, MAArcheDlogical & Oklahoma Press EthnDlagi~1 Papers of the Peabody Museum, United States Bureau OfIndian Affairs 1860 Reportof Harvard University, vall no 2 the Commissioneroflndian AffairsAccompanying Hall TD 1989 Social Change in the Southwest: 135D­ the Annual Report of the Secretary of Interior 1880Lawrence: U Press Kansas Washington, DC: George W Brown Himmel KF 1995 Anglo-Texans, Karankawas, and Webb ML 1965 Religious and Educational Efforts Tonkawas, 1821-1859:A SociologicalAnalysis of Among Texas Indians in the 1850s Southwestern Conquest PhD. diss. U Texas at Austin H Qrt/y69 22-37 Horsman R 1981 Race and Manifest Destiny: The Webb WP 1936 The Great Plains: A Study in Insti­ Origins ofAmerican RacialAnglo-SaxDnism Cam­ tutions andEnvironmentNY: Houghton-Mifflin bridge, MA: Harvard Winfrey D, J Day 1966 The Indian PapersofTexas and Hoxie FE 1984 A Final Promise: The Campaign to the Southwest, 1825-1916;Vo/umellf, 1846-1859 Assimilate the Indians, 1880-1920 Lincoln: U Ne­ Austin, TX: Pemberton braska Press Wishart DJ 1994 An Unspeakable Sadness: The Indian Office LettersReceived, Texas 1854-1859pho­ Dispossession ofthe Nebraska Indians lincoln: U tocopies in the Center for American History U Nebraska TexasatAustin '