The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1876-12-27
The United States Indian Policy.

In his message sent to Congress last week
President Grant makes the following state
ment:
GA policy has been adopted towards the
Indian tribes inhabiting large portion Of
the territory of the United States which has
been humane, and has substantially ended
Indian hostilities in the whole land, except
in portion of Nebraska and Dakota, Wy
oming and Montana Territories, the Black
Hills region and approaches thereto. Hos
tilities there have grown out of the avarice
of the white man, who has violated our
treaty stipulations in his search for gold
The question might be asked why the Gov
eminent has not enforced obedience to the
terms of the treaty prohibiting the occupa-
ton of the Black Hills region by whites
The answer is simple. The fret immigrants
to the Black Hills were removed by troops
but rumors of rich discoveries of gold took
into that region increased numbers. Gold
was found in paying quantity, and an effort
to remove the miners would only result in
the desertion of the bulk of the troops that
might be sent there to remove them"
What humiliating confession to De made
by the COMMUNICATIVE of the army of a
great civilized people The powerful United
States Government makes treaties with the
feeble wandering tribes of Indians, and then
proclaims that its policy is very humane, but
that it cannot fulfil its treaty stipulations.
After it has confessed it's failure, itsends
troops to punish the Indians for attempting
to protect their rights; number of these
troops are killed, and the cry is raised that
the Indians have murdered those who were
sent to destroy them
In the above extract from the Presidents
message, in which the shame of the United
States is proclaimed, the explanation is said
to be "simple." Simple enough, and dis
graceful enough it is, as given-thas the
United States army cannot be depended upon
when tempted by the lust of gold. As soon
as "gold was found in paying quantity, an
effort to remove the miners would only re
suit in the desertion of the bulk of the
troops that might be sent there to remove
them " What picture of the character of
this army, as painted by its commander-in-
chief But We doubt whether this ''Simple"
answer is complete: it ought to have been
supplemented by the statement of the addi-
tional fact that large part of the Federal
army had not been exposed to this tempta-
ton of "gold they we're used against a
peaceable people who would not resist; and
we're used to overthrow one political party
and promote the interests of another.
We cannot believe the Presidents repre-
sensations of the character of the Federal
army; we cannot believe that they are so
worthless and disloyal as he charges them
with being. We see how promptly they
obey the Presidents commands to overrun a
State and perform police duty with it; to 60
to one capital after another to secure the
counting in of certain candidate for
office; we see how obediently they submit to
the commands of the lowest underlings of
the late Governor of South Carolina in de-
priving of their rights those whom the PEG.
pie have faily elected to office; we know that
large number of them loathe the deteStable
work in which they are thus engaged; and
therefore, since with Soldierly obedience they
allow themselves to be employed in such
work-in depriving their fellow. citizens of
their rights-we cannot believe the President
when he intimates that the United States
cannot depend upon its army in carrying
out treaty stipulations with the defenceless
Indians.
One of the saddest results of this breach
of solemn engagements is the additional bar
rier which it raises against the progress of
Christianity amongst the heather. The mis-
sionary breaches the Christian religion the
Indian asks if that is not the religion of the
white man, who makes treaties with him and
breaks them, and who then declares war
against him, burns his lodges, steals his
squaws and children, and threatens him and
his with utter determination. What can the
missionary say in reply to the heather In
dams question? What reasonable prospect
is there under these circumstances that the
savage Indian will accept the religion of the
civilized white man? And especially when
he is told that his Great Father at Wash
ington, the ruler over the white Christian,
boasts that his policy towards the Indian is
remarkable for it's humanity? May not the
poor Indian well ask, If this is the powerful
white Christians "humanitY," what must
his cruelty be?-Southern Presbyterian.