New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-07-24

ters we have had somewhat too much already Tor
our good or the good of the Indians
Lieutenant Wood heartily approves. as a nearly
ideal system of Indian administration. that dcega-
ton OF the Presidents functions to religious socie
ties which nearly everybody else in the country
has come to regard as at best makeshft. He adj
vocatcs the breaking up of the tribal bond and the
apportonment of lands IN soveralty-as nearly all
expert observers of Indian affairs do-and suggests
system of temporary exemption from taxation,
with which few persons will quarrel. In order
that the Indians may not be taught to he paupers,
lie would have the Government give them nothing
Neither supplies for consumption implements s
OF hushandly-eXcept III return for work done. II
suggestion sound enough in principle doubtless,
hut one which it would be next to impossible to
apply practically in most
The most interesting thing in Lieutenant Woods
essay his curious contradiction of General Gibbon
upon the point which General Gilbon lays most
stress namely the system of distributing supplies
to the Indians, or, if General Gibb0n right, the
system of not distributing the supplies furnished by
the Government. We have seen what General
Gibbon has to say this subject. Lieutenant
Wood says
Since 1874, and especially under Mr.. Schurz, the
system of purchases expenditures fixing of rcSnon-
sbitics and securing the interests Of the Govern
ment, IN the Indian Ohce has largely been re
modelled and Il system of guards and checks has
been produced similar to that of the Quart ermaserS
Department OF the Army The reports from 1874
TO 1879 both inclusive, will show that most if not
All OF the looSencSS Of transacton-and consequent
temptation has been removed. and the punishment
OF fraud has been very successful.
nen the means ol detecting fraud are excellent
and the punishment OF 1t vigorous the plan is COM
pletc; for no system of surveillance will produce
an honest man from thief
Finally, Lieutenant Wood is convinced that the
transfer of Indian management from the Interior
TO the War Department would he hurtful to the
interests of he Indians and disastrous to the Army.
" 1t would he an element of corruption" he says,
" in Il healthy body"
Captain Butler agrees scarcely AZ all with his
fellow csSayiSts. He finds in history trace of the
noble savage whom Cooper paints and General
Gibbon accepts, On the contrary, he begins his
essay by saying:
The condition of the Rcd Men of the North Amcri.
can continent. when they were first met by their
white brothers, was as low as that of any race of
winch history has preserved a record. IN intellcc-
tual Development they were but one remove above
the wild animals they huntcd-thcy had no science
no art worthy of the name. They had nc industry,
no manufactures. Their vcSturc the skins of
beasts killed in the chase and the flesh of these fur
niShcd almost their only means of subsistence.
They knew nothing of Instruments of iron. They
had no domestic animals their agriculture was
limited To the cultN alton of little mlIlc to sup
plement the produce q the chase. Even this scanty
crop was raised by the labor of the women. The
Red Man Was olygamist and tn" Rcd Woman
was his slave--the slave of his lust his Incidence
and his pride
This picture, elaborated in the essay, is 50
strongly in contrast with that which General Glib
| not know bcttcr-that the two writers discuss
ing different subjects and des riding different peo-
pies. Further than this, Captain Butler sets at
narght not only the opinions of both the other
writer's i'll the number, but the decisions of the
United States Supreme Court also respecting the
nature of me Indians tide to their lands at the
time of the white mans advent. The Supreme
Court has held that the Indians had no positive
ownership, but that they had clear right of occu-
patton, usufruct right in their lands. General
GibbOn and Lieutenant Wood concc1e this will
ingly. but Captain Batter declares that the Indians
whom the whites found in possession were mere
trespassers by violence that the tribes in possess
sion had wrested their lands by force from other
tribes and, holders by their toris, were pos
ed of no title al all superior To that which the
whites were at liberty to acquire by simple acts Of
conquest.
In like manner he argues chat all the treaty
| breaking of which have been asked to be
ashamed has not been a breach of faith the part
of the Government at all. lie finds the Indians
themselves in fault in these matters. and reviews
tie history of the most prominent cases for the prr
pose of showing that by trcachcry, bad faith dis
loyalty and acts OF unprovokcd war, the Indians
have repeatedly forfeited all their rights under
treaties, and have absoved the Government from
all its obligations to them.
The purpose of this review is oXposory, not con-
troversial but may at least suggest thai Cap
tain Butler seems to have read history with a bias
and n.malng use of it he treats facts a tre too
broadly and generally, not say carcessy times
In Illustration of this refer to what he says on
| page POS of Indian methods of fighting:
Indian loss in battle with the whites Is generally
! insignificant. IT is not in their tactics 20 cXpoSc
| themselves. They are not found In the grand
clashes of aIms where thousands fall. They hos cr
on the Hanks of their civilized allies. cut oil the
strasglcrs, murder and torture the wounded aud the
! prisoners, Their cardinal prnclple IN what they
| al ~
| heavy Indian loss IS only possible when they are
| surprised, surrounded, and there is chance of
scattering cOnceament or flight. Then. when they
| feel their hour is come, they Turn and fight like
J tigers at bay.
| This is correct enough, perhaps as desert pton
of the tactics of the Plain Indians Of to day, but in
an essay which deals this does with the
| wars of Tccunlseh. Of the Greeks in Alabama etc.
| it shows lack OF discrimination. In those
| wars there real battles fought and at Ioho
! pcla, for example, and at Emucfau, the conduct
of the Indians that OF trained and good soldiers
1T is "A small matter, but wonder what Captain
! Butler thinks the word Intcrncciuc" means mas
much as he speaks, ON page 1876 of &" bloody inter
nccinc feuds," and in other places the word in
a way which suggests that he mistakes its meaning
and supposes it to refer in way to intestinal
| distinguished from external wars and quarrcls.
On the whole, the three essays, if they do not
reveal to us any settled, homogeneous policy which
may he regarded as that of the Army at least show
us how widely Army officers differ IN opinion on
this subject and free from the prevalent miscon-
ception that the Army has policy the benefits of
which are to be had by placing Indian affairs in the
hanus OF the War Department. There is profit even
| in this negative teaching.
| THE ORIGINS OF CONTEMPORARY FRANCE: TIE
TkEEchI REV0nurIo&: iiy i4rroL9rE AnoLrilH
NOs IL. 12Uo, PIP. 5JS. lcAiY iiult