University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, History, Department of Department of History 7-1962 The nI terior Department, War Department and Indian Policy, 1865-1887 Henry George Waltmann University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss Part of the American Studies Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Waltmann, Henry George, "The nI terior Department, War Department and Indian Policy, 1865-1887" (1962). Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History. 74. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historydiss/74 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, & Student Research, Department of History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Copyright by HENRY GEORGE WALTMANN 1963 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT, WAR DEPARTMENT AND INDIAN POLICY, 1865-188? by Henry GVc ° Waltmann A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College in the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History Under the Supervision of Dr. James C. Olson Lincoln, Nebraska July, 1962 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PREFACE More than eighty years ago Maj. Gen. Philip H. Sheridan, a veteran commander of troops in the trans- Mississippi West, candidly predicted, .there is no subject connected with the history of the country ^which/ will be more interesting to the future student than the fate of the red man...."^ While the comparative popularity of historical topics may be mooted, it is certain that scholars, as well as casual observers, have shown extra­ ordinary interest in Indian affairs, particularly in the post-Civil War era. Anthropologists, ethnologists, sociologists and western, cultural, military, social and administrative historians have done extensive research in this field. Numerous works have been published on the last Indian wars, tribal and regional Indian history, the cultural clash between the red ana white races, the experi­ ments of humanitarians and reformers, the dispossession of tfEfe^ribes and the development of the government's Indian policy.^ ^Kaj. Gen. Philip H. Sheridan to Lt. Gan. William T. Sherman, April , 1878 , ^Philip H. Sheridan Letter Book, General Correspondence, Sheridan Papers, Manuscript division, Library of Congress. 2 See the bibliography and comments in: Thomas Torrans, "General Works on the American Indian," Arizona and the West, II (Spring, I960), 79-103J William 1. Hagan, American Indians (Chicago, 1961). 175-183 and Frederick J. Dockstadter, The American Indian in Graduate Studies (New York, 1957)* ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Still our knowledge of the Indian and the history of Indian-white relations is far from complete. Until recently, for example, little work had been done to synthesize and interpret the role of the red man within 3 the purview of western or national development. Pleas have been made for a more balanced approach to various aspects of Indian affairs. Many standard works are one­ sided* because they present a more or less pro-Indian or anti-Indian point of view or concentrate upon European- American expansion, treating the Indian as an impersonal, environmental factor.^- Opportunities exist, too, for example, for a comprehensive examination of the impact of political, social and economic trends upon Indian po3 5cy. The present study focuses upon another significant, but neglected, aspect of Indian history — the inter-relation betv>:>,:',.a the War and Interior departments and Indian policy# Seme • v.alysts have briefly mentioned the difficulty entailed in not having a clear understanding of which branch of ^Hagan, 0£. cIt., provides a provokative overview of the impact of tEe Indians upon American history but does not exhaust the subject. ^■Jack D. Forbes, "The Indian in the West: A Challenge for Historians,"'Arizona and the West, I (Autumn, 1959), 206-215# Forbes contends ’that the works of Frederic L. Paxson, Robert E. Riegel, Bay Billington, LeRoy R. Hafen, Carl C. Rister and others — all leading western historians — fail to consider the Indian as a "positive factor in the expansion of Anglo-American culture." He recommends an integration of historical and anthropological studies and a re-assessment of common generalizations about the red man. ill Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. government should act upon the tribes. “A cardinal error of the government," one prominent historian observes, "lay in tolerating ’a vague division of authority over the Indians between the war and interior department."^ Those primarily concerned with the Army's campaigns against hostile tribes have also mentioned the inter­ departmental problem. "The Indian Eureau," one author states with obvious bias, "...hamstrung the Army right and left when it had the chance.Others more interested in the Indians' side of the story have cited the same difficulty, arraigning the Army for vindictiveness and 7 interference.' Still others, with greater objectivity, have summarized the contest between the departments over Q control of the Indian Bureau. By examining the question of Indian management daring the generation after the Civil War in some detail, the author has endeavored to demonstrate the nature and significance of this dual system and its implications for the nation and its wards. ^Allen Nevins, The Emergence of Modern America (New York, 1927), lOij.. ^Fairfax Downey, Indian Fighting Army (New York, 1957), ia . f9 fPerhaps the best example of this viewpoint is found in George W. Manypenny, Our Indian Wards (Cincinnati, l880)» O Loring B. Priest, Uncle Sam»s Stepchildren (New Brunswick, 19q2), Chapter ‘fwo; Donald J. D'Elia, ^The Argu­ ment Over Civilian or Military Indian Control, 1865-1880," The Historian, XXIV (February, 19.62), 207-225. iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The period which has been chosen for analysis, 1865 to 1887 , was decisive in the history of Indian-white relations, for it was in these years that westward expansion rapidly closed the frontier and increased inter-racial contacts. Prom the point of view of the red man, it was an ora of social and cultural crisis and the last stage of white exploitation. For the government, it was a time of decision, because it was no longer possible to temporize with the Indian question. The passage of the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 , which established a general system of private land-ownership and citizenship for most Indians and which has been taken as the concluding point for this investi­ gation, has commonly been interpreted as a turning point in Indian history. The writer is indebted to those who have aided in this study. He is grateful, first of all, to Dr. James C. Olson, Professor of American History at the University of Nebraska for his encouragement and assistance in the preparation of this manuscript. Professor Olson*s patient reading of original drafts and suggestions, based upon extensive familiarity with Indian affairs, have been of special benefit. Secondly, for financial assistance, he is obliged to the Addison E. Sheldon Foundation and Board of College Education of the American Lutheran Church. Fellowships from these sources enabled him to spend several v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. weeks in Washington D.C. and elsewhere doing research. Thirdly, a word of appreciation is due to those who facilitated his search for printed and unprinted materials at the National Archives, Library of Congress, Hayes Memorial Library, Oberlin College Library, Nebraska State Historical Society and other depositories. Finally, the author owes sincere thanks to his wife, Mary Louise Waltmann, who patiently assisted in preliminary research and the final checking of this dissertation. vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OP CONTENTS Chapter PREPAGE ....................................... ii 1 1865: AN AUSPICIOUS AND FITTING TIME The Indians in 1865 • ••«••••••••• ij. Pre-Civil War Indian Relations ••••••• 9 Indian Affairs During the Civil W a r ........... 19 Administrative Problems at War*s End • • • • 2lj. Civil-Military Relations • • ............... 29 2 LEADERSHIP OP THE INTERIOR AND WAR DEPARTMENTS: 1865-1887. The Interior Department and Indian Adminis­ tration .......................• . k k Secretaries of the Interior • ........ k 7 Commissioners of Indian Affairs • • . • 58 The War Department and Military Policy 71 Secretaries of War •••••••••• 72 Generals-in-Chlef ........... .«••• 82 3 OLIVE BRANCH AND CARBINE: January, 1866, to July, 1867. Preparations for Peace and War in 1866 . 93 The petterman Massacre •••••••••.• 108 Early Debate over Transfer of the Indian Bureau 113 Civil-Military Relations in the Southwest • • 120 Further Difficulties on the Plains