The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1874-06-24
From the Republic
Indian determination or Civtltza-

may be completed, by contract, within
five years" These words were utter
ed in Washington recently, with ap-
parent seriousness, in the presence OF
the Governor of Texas, two members
of Congress. and the writer. Their
author is a resident Of border State
/ and man of considerable Intelligence.
In the language used he expressed
| the popular sentiment of frontiers
men: They are thieves, they are
| treacherous, they are vagabOnds.
Undian Commissioner report, 1873.
page 3l), is the verdict of desperadoes
| who in many cases may have already
/ robbed them of their hunting grounds
| and almost of their humanity.
Up to comparatively recent period
the border pioneers and the Indians
| whom they crowded back from their
hunting and fishing places have gener-
ally cherished feeling OF distrust
toward each other, which often ripen-
ed into enmIty, intense hatred, and
acts of hostility. The white man has,
of necessity, been aggressive in his
movements; and the Indian, naturally
tenacious of his rights, becomes jeal-
Gus and revengetul; and though
neither party may have been vlciously
disposed before coming in contact,
yet in their relations and intercourse,
the principles of peace and harmony
were too often disregarded, and an an
tagonism usurped their place. Thus
the opposing parties lived in constant
animosity toward each other; and the
strongest were too frequently ready to
redress their real or imaginary wrongs
by banishing their weaker opponents
from the neighborhoOd or striking
them down upon the spot.
1t is well known, however, that
much of the enmity heretofore exist
ing between frontier settlers and the
Indian tribes, was due to lawless des-
peradoes who followed close upon the
advance of honest settlers for purposes
of speculation and plunder, and whose
success in their nefarlous calling de-
pended largely upon creating and
keeping up an antagonism between
the settlers and the Indians. which
would require the presence of an army
to prevent or suppress war between
savage and civilized life. Such is the
testimony not only of the chiefs of the
tribes, but of peaceably disposed set
tiers, and, in short, of all who have
been long conversant with Indian at
fairs (Report of the Joint Special
Committee of Congress on the condi-
tion of the Indian tribes, appointed
March 3, 1868, page 81 This will be
demonstrated more fully in the subse
quent evidence.
l. THE FORMER INDIAN POLICY OF
THE GOVERNMENT.
The Congress of the United States
and the successive Administrations at
Washington have always desired 10
maintain peaeeable relations with the
Indian tribes. and to secure harmony
between them and the frontier settlers.
The tribes have always been recog
nized as independent peoples, and
their chiefs as sovereigns. With
them treaties were made as with for
eign nations. As contracting party
the Government adhered to its treaty
stipulations and required the other
party to do the same But here the
philanthropic efforts of the Govern
ment in measure ended, and the
work of the mischief makers COM
menced.
DESTRUCTIVE FRONTIER WARS.
As civilization pressed forward and
occupied the fertile plains and valleys,
cherished as favorite hunting and fish
ing grounds by the Indians, the latter
naturally opposed these intrusions,
and although bona fide settlers were
careful not to give offensc when it
could be avoided, yet there were al
ways class of adventurers and law
less desperadoes present whose chief
interest was in having an army pres
ent. and who never lost an opportuni-
ty to bring about war The murder
of an Indian or two by white outlaws
was not considered sufficient cause
in itself for the presence of an army,
but it was not untrequentiy made the
initiatory movement to bring about
that result. Generally no arrest, trial,
or punishment followed the offense.
But if the chief. failing to see the of
fender punished, undertook TO avenge
the wrong committed against his tribe,
Il United States army order was imme-
diately issued, and n war generally
ensued. Colonel Bent. who has lived
upon the Upper Arkansas, near Bent's
fort, for thlrty-slx years, IN his testi-
mony before the Joint Committee of
Congress on the condition of the In
dian tribes, appointed March 3, 1868,
stated that: In nearly every instance
difficulties between Indians and the
whites arose from aggressions on the
Indians by the whites He cited
eases in point. Among them were
the war with the Sioux in 1851, and
the war with the Arrapahoes and
Cheyennes in 1865. (Appendix to
Committee Report, page, 93 Kit
Carson, who lived in the plains and
upon the mountains of the Western
country from 1926. in his testimony
before the committee confirmed this
statement: "As a general thing the
difficulties arise from aggressions on
the part of the whites, who are always
eursing the Indians, and are not will
ing TO do them Justice" (Appendix
to Report, page 80 The committee
formed itself into three divisions Tor
taking testimony, one branch in Kan
sas, the Indian Territory, Colorado,
New Mexico. and Utah, another in
California, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho.
Montana, and Washington Territory:
ana the third in Minnesota. Nebraska.
Dakota, and Upper Montana; and at.
ter coming together and combaripc
notes, the committee were forced Ia
the opinion that. In large maior;tv
OF cases Indian wars are to be traced /
to the aggreSSious of lawless wb;,.
men. always to be fund upon tbe
frontier or boundary line between saw
age and civilized life (Report Of
page 81
Without going into details, this NAV |
be accepted as truthful representa-
ton of the state of affairs for nearly a
hundred wears mast Eighty wars