The Board of Indian Commissioners: hope, failure and abandonment 1869-1887 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Cartwright, Charles Edward Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 02/10/2021 05:17:09 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/557428 THE BOARD OF INDIAN COMMISSIONERS: HOPE, FAILURE AND ABANDONMENT 1869-1887 by Charles Edward Cartwright A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 8 0 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­ quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: CfyL&LLtu^iA APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: < ROGER L. NICHOLS Date Professor of History ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many persons have supplied enormous amounts of cooperation while I was undertaking this study. First I would like to express my grati­ tude to the staff associated with the Government Documents Section of The University of Arizona Library. Large numbers of government docu­ ments were essential to this study and without the sincere interest and gracious aid of this section I would have been unable to finish. I also extend my appreciation to the persons of the Interlibrary loan department who were able to obtain necessary volumes unavailable in the University library. Finally, I express my gratitude to the staff of The University of Arizona law library, who supplied needed information essential to the coordination of certain nineteenth century law cases with the subject. Aside from these groups various persons deserve special atten­ tion. I wish to express my gratitude to Vine Deloria and Edgar Moore who provided advice and expertise at critical stages of the work. Heartfelt appreciation is extended to two persons. Professor Roger L. Nichols, my supervisor, who demonstrated patience and understanding throughout my endeavor, deserves special praise. Without his guidance the work would not have.been possible. He smoothed out the problems . when at times they seemed too great. To the second person, Ann M. Dotzel, special appreciation is felt. Her assistance to the author was invaluable. Besides seeing to it that deadlines were kept, she proved indispensible as a reader and typist. Many other persons assisted at iii iv various stages throughout the work, however time and space to not allow for individual praise. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT . ...................................................... vi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1 II. BACKGROUND: HISTORICAL AND IDEOLOGICAL ................... 5 III. THE BOARD OF INDIAN COMMISSIONERS: FORMATION AND PHILOSOPHY............................................. 27 IV. HOPE: EARLY YEARS OF THE BOARD 1869-1873 ................ 54 V. FAILURE: LOST OPPORTUNITY 1874-1878 94 VI. ABANDONMENT: INDEPENDENCE AND PRINCIPLES VANISH 1879-1887 127 APPENDIX A. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF INDIAN COMMISSIONERS, 1869-1888 ....................................... 165 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................... 166 V ABSTRACT This work deals with the Board of Indian Commissioners, an advisory group to the President and the Interior Department established during the Grant Administration. The primary duties of the Board con­ sisted in the supervision of the Indian Bureau and the protection of Indian rights. The study focuses upon the period from the creation of the Board in 1869 until 1887, concluding with the passage of the Dawes Act in the latter year. After the adoption of a number of long-urged policies, culminated by the Dawes Act, the influence of the Board declined. Board recommendations and principles came to reflect a variety of influences. The feelings of the times which were instrumental in its formation continued to both aid and to hinder the actions of the Board throughout the period. Because of the fluctuating nature of the Board and its changing relation to the government, its performance was difficult to evaluate. Examination revealed the complex nature of the agency. At times the actions of the Board demonstrated its sincere desire to reform the Indian Bureau, while at others it appeared almost subservient to the very organization it was to oversee, and if possible, reform. vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION At the time of the creation of the Board, America was still reeling from the trauma of the Civil War, death and destruction had taken heavy toll on both the American psychology and economy. As a result, Americans could not withstand a long drawn out struggle with the Indian. In light of this feeling, the reform policies advocated by Ulysses S. Grant seemed a pleasant surprise. Congress in 1869 created the Board of Indian Commissioners, a group of philanthropists to advise the Indian Bureau, in response to the growing feeling that non­ governmental oversight of the Indian Bureau was essential. Without it, graft and inefficiency would complicate the Indian problem and plunge the nation into a series of brutal and devastating Indian wars. Thus the Board of Indian Commissioners would provide sorely needed super­ vision. The tremendous potential of such a group did not escape the reformers, yet this potential remained relatively unfulfilled. Political maneuvering hampered its development. As a result the Board found itself stymied in its reform efforts. Gradually frustration set in and the original members of the group resigned. At this juncture, in 1874, the Board experienced a remarkable transition, marking the end of the first period of Board operations. Afterwards the second of the three periods developed, each with its own personality. The first group ( 1 2 of gentlemen demonstrated considerably more independence than their successors. Their zealous pursuit of their duties illustrated their sincere desire to aid the Indian. The second group served during the period from 1874 to 1878. They seem to have lacked the spirit and independence of their prede­ cessors. Howeverf in all fairness, it should be noted that their action actions came at the darkest time of the "Peace Policy.” From 1874 to 1878 a series of Indian wars raged across the West, severely'under­ cutting the stand of the Administration and the Board. Yet a certain degree of failure may be attributed to the Board in these times. Members ignored the actual situation and refused to recognize its importance. Thus one may argue that they contradicted their own existence by not protecting the Indian and supervising the system. The third period in the Board's history occurred after 1878, when it became almost totally subservient to the Interior Department. Coincidentally this period marked the growth of Indian rights groups. Formerly the protection of Indian rights was to have been a function of the Board, but after 1880 its attention turned to a select group of Indians rather than all Indians. The Board's importance in the entire period from 1869 to 1887 stemmed not so much from its actions as it did from the reasoning behind them. Politically, it supplied little to the development of major Indian policies; for the most part, the decision makers ignored the recommendations of the Board. What then was its contribution? First, it dealt with a variety of incidents of lesser importance, smoothing the ruffled feathers of the tribes. These actions pertained to everything 3 from the issuance of goods to the negotiation of land cessions. Though the actions may sound impressive one must remember that the Board lacked any power to enforce its recommendations. Strictly advisory from its beginning, the Board remained so throughout the period. Its second contribution was probably its most important. Its supervisory capacity led many persons to believe that constructive change was being undertaken by the government. Actually this was far from the case. Occasionally the Board would call ir­ regularities to public attention and some official would be dismissed. But a greater number of irregularities continued. By creating the impression that significant reform efforts were underway, the Grant Administration lessened reformers' pleas for wholesale renovation of the system. There was, however, little or nothing that the Board could do to supervise the entire system. The duties assigned to the Board were too great for its nine members. The geographic and administrative areas to be supervised simply proved beyond their capabilities. The travels of the .original members demonstrated that they earnestly attempted to fulfill their duties. However,