No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
“More Conscience Than Force”: U.S. Indian Inspector William Vandever, Grant's Peace Policy, and Protestant Whiteness1
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 November 2010
Extract
William Vandever (1817–1893) served as a U.S. Indian inspector from 1873 until early 1878. A lawyer by profession, Vandever had been a Republican congressman from Iowa and a Civil War officer. (Later, he would return to Congress, representing California.). While serving with the Indian Office, he became a critic of the militarization of federal Indian policy, so much so as to be reprimanded and not reappointed. His experience enables a reconsideration of President U.S. Grant's peace policy in at least two areas. First, as one of a new group of Office of Indian Affairs officials, Vandever provides a view of federal Indian policy from the middle level of the federal bureaucracy during the 1870s. His case especially illustrates his bureau's attempts to centralize civilian management of Indian reservations. Second, Vandever's policy criticisms, though they assumed white American “civilization” as normative, more immediately arose from his religious perspective. Although he lost his post, Vandever serves to highlight the privileged role of white Protestantism during Grant's peace policy. He exemplified a set of racialized religious sensibilities that were important at the time and that could be termed Protestant whiteness.
- Type
- Essays
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society for Historians of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 2010
References
2 This quotation and those in the next four paragraphs are from William Vandever to J. Elliot Condict, Jan. 4, 1877, folder 2, box 7, William Vandever Papers, Special Collections, Charles C. Myers Library, University of Dubuque (hereafter, Vandever Papers). All quotations from Vandever follow his spelling, punctuation, grammar, and use of proper names.
3 Vandever's correspondent,Condict, J. Elliot, was also a devout Presbyterian; a year prior to Vandever's reply, he had published “Our Indians and the Duty of the Presbyterian Church to Them,” Presbyterian Quarterly and Princeton Review 5 (Jan. 1876): 76–93.Google Scholar
4 Photocopy of Vandever to B. A. Stephens, Dec. 28, 1886, folder of documents by Vandever from other collections, unnumbered box, Vandever Papers. Captain Myron VanDerWeer came to New Netherlands in 1635.
5 Civil War Pension Record, 1893. photocopy of National Archives and Record Administration [NARA] record, in William Vandever biographical file, Ventura County Historical Collection, Ventura County Museum of History and Art, Ventura, CA;[Committee on History,] A History of One Hundred Years, 1850–1950: Westminster Presbyterian Church, Dubuque, Iowa (Dubuque, IA, 1950?), 11, 14Google Scholar;Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, 1884, New Series, vol. 8 (Philadelphia, 1884), 172Google Scholar;Baur, John E., “William Vandever: Ventura's First Congressman,” Ventura County Historical Society Quarterly 20 (Fall 1974): 23Google Scholar.
6 “Good Words from Gen. Wm. Vandever, One of Iowa's Best Men: Prohibition Legally and Morally Considered,” printed broadsheet, folio, n.d., flat folder 2, Vandever Papers.
7 Washington National Tribune, Dec. 15, 1887Google Scholar;U.S. War Department, The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, ser. 1, vol. 39, pt. III (Washington, DC, 1892), 78Google Scholar.
8 Sizer, Sandra S., Gospel Hymns and Social Religion: The Rhetoric of Nineteenth-Century Revivalism (Philadelphia, 1978), 40–41, 188n15Google Scholar.
9 Anderson, Douglas Firth, “‘A True Revival of Religion’: Protestants and the San Francisco Graft Prosecutions, 1906–1909,” Religion and American Culture 4 (Winter 1994): 25–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and, Anderson, “‘We Have Here a Different Civilization’: Protestant Identity in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1906–1909,” Western Historical Quarterly 23 (May 1992): 200–01Google Scholar.
10 The canopy metaphor is fromMarty, Martin E., Modern American Religion, vol. 1, The Irony of It All, 1893–1919 (Chicago, 1986), ch. 9Google Scholar. On Anglo-American Protestantism, seeHatch, Nathan O., The Democratization of American Christianity (New Haven, 1989)Google Scholar;Handy, Robert T., A Christian America: Protestant Hopes and Historical Realities, 2nd ed. (New York, 1984)Google Scholar;May, Henry F., “The Religion of the Republic” in May, Ideas, Faiths, and Feelings: Essays on American Intellectual History and Religious History, 1952–1982 (New York, 1983), 163–86Google Scholar
11 May, “The Religion of the Republic,” andMeyer, D. H., The Instructed Conscience: The Shaping of the American National Ethic (Philadelphia, 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, provide background on white Protestantism's moralism and practical idealism. For the concept of moral custodianship, seeWacker, Grant, “Uneasy in Zion: Evangelicals in Postmodern Society” in Evangelicalism and Modern America, ed. George Marsden (Grand Rapids, MI, 1984), 22–24Google Scholar.
12 Strong, Josiah, Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis (New York, 1885)Google Scholar.
13 See, for example,Abzug, Robert H., Cosmos Crumbling: American Reform and the Religious Imagination (New York, 1994)Google Scholar; and Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity.
14 Richardson, Heather Cox, “Reconstruction and the American West: An Interview,” conducted by Stephens, Randall J., Historically Speaking 9 (Sept.–Oct. 2007): 26.Google Scholar
15 SeeRichardson, Heather Cox, West from Appomattox: The Reconstruction of America after the Civil War (New Haven, 2007).Google Scholar
16 Blum, Edward J., Reforging the White Republic: Race, Religion, and American Nationalism, 1865–1898 (Baton Rouge, LA, 2005), 5–7.Google Scholar
17 Keller, Robert H. Jr, American Protestantism and United States Indian Policy, 1869–82 (Lincoln, NE, 1983).Google Scholar
18 Baur provides a brief summary of, Vandever's life in “William Vandever,” 11–25Google Scholar. There has been no critical study of Vandever and Indian policy to date. SeeOlson, James C., Red Cloud and the Sioux Problem (Lincoln, NE, 1965), 220Google Scholar;Stuart, Paul, The Indian Office: Growth and Development of an American Institution, 1865–1900 (Ann Arbor, MI, 1979), 93, 106, 108–09Google Scholar;, Keller, Protestantism and United States Indian Policy, 178Google Scholar;Bender, Norman J., “New Hope for the Indians”: The Grant Peace Policy and the Navajos in the 1870s (Albuquerque, NM, 1989), 101, 171Google Scholar;Sweeney, Edwin R., Cochise: Chiricahua Apache Chief (Norman, OK, 1991), 386–87, 391Google Scholar.
19 The Bureau of Indian Affairs did not become the official name until 1947. The Gilded Age names—the Indian Office and OIA—will be used in this essay. SeePrucha, Francis Paul, The Great Father: The United States Government and the American Indians (Lincoln, NE, 1984), app. D, 1227–29Google Scholar.
20 See, for example,Whitner, Robert L., “Grant's Indian Peace Policy on the Yakima Reservation, 1870–82” in The Western American Indian: Case Studies in Tribal History, ed. Ellis, Richard N. (Lincoln, NE, 1972), 50–60Google Scholar;Murphy, Lawrence R., Frontier Crusader—William F. M. Arny (Tucson, AZ, 1972)Google Scholar;Unrau, William E., “The Civilian as Indian Agent: Villain or Victim?” Western Historical Quarterly 3 (Oct. 1972): 405–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar;Harte, John Bret, “The Strange Case of Joseph C. Tiffany: Indian Agent in Disgrace,” Journal of Arizona History 16 (Winter 1975): 383–404Google Scholar;Kvasnicka, Robert M. and Viola, Herman J., eds., The Commissioners of Indian Affairs, 1824–1977 (Lincoln, NE, 1979)Google Scholar; Stuart, The Indian Office; Prucha, The Great Father; Bender, “New Hope for the Indians”;Stamm, Henry E. IV, “The Peace Policy Experiment at Wind River: The James Irwin Years, 1870–1877,” Montana: The Magazine of Western History 41 (Summer 1991): 56–69Google Scholar;Dibbern, John, “The Reputations of Indian Agents: A Reappraisal of John P. Clum and Joseph C. Tiffany,” Journal of the Southwest 39 (Summer 1997): 201–38Google Scholar;Anderson, Douglas Firth, “Protestantism, Progress, and Prosperity: John P. Clum and ‘Civilizing’ the U.S. Southwest, 1871–1886,” Western Historical Quarterly 33 (Autumn 2002): 315–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
21 , Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 17Google Scholar, comments, “What it did, who did it, and what it meant confused everyone”; also 250n1–2.book, Besides Keller's, other important considerations of Grant's peace policy include Robert Winston Mardock, The Reformers and the American Indian (Columbia, MO, 1971)Google Scholar;Waltmann, Henry G., “Circumstantial Reformer: President Grant and the Indian Problem,” Arizona and the West 13 (Winter 1971): 323–42Google Scholar;, Prucha, The Great Father, 479–606Google Scholar;Levine, Richard R., “Indian Fighters and Indian Reformers: Grant's Indian Peace Policy and the Conservative Consensus,” Civil War History 31.4 (1985): 329–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; andSim, David, “The Peace Policy of Ulysses S. Grant,” American Nineteenth Century History 9 (Sept. 2008): 241–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
22 Gump, James O., The Dust Rose Like Smoke: The Subjugation of the Zulu and the Sioux (Lincoln, Neb, 1994)Google Scholar, and, Gump, “Civil Wars in South Dakota and South Africa: The Role of the ‘Third Force,’” Western Historical Quarterly 34 (Winter 2003): 427–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
23 SeeOstler, Jeffrey, The Plains Sioux and U.S. Colonialism from Lewis and Clark to Wounded Knee (New York, 2004), 14–15Google Scholar, on Jefferson and American expansion;Whaley, Gray H., “Oregon, Illahee, and the Empire Republic: A Case Study of American Colonialism, 1843–1858,” Western Historical Quarterly 36 (Summer 2005): 158CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the history of “civilizing” North American Indians, see esp.Berkhofer, Robert F. Jr, The White Man's Indian: Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present (New York, 1978)Google Scholar;Hoxie, Frederick E., A Final Promise: The Campaign to Assimilate the Indians, 1880–1920 (1984; New York, 1989)Google Scholar;Higham, C. L., Noble, Wretched, and Redeemable: Protestant Missionaries to the Indians in Canada and the United States, 1820–1900 (Albuquerque, NM, 2000)Google Scholar.
24 Dubuque Daily Times, July 25, 1893Google Scholar;Washington National Tribune, Dec. 15, 1887Google Scholar;Weekly Dubuque Tribune, June 1, 1853Google Scholar.
25 Weekly Dubuque Tribune, May 11, 1853, advertisement.Google Scholar
26 Congressional Globe, 36th Cong., 1st sess. (Apr. 27, 1860), app., 269–70.
27 On Vandever's Civil War service, seeBaker, Nathaniel B., Report of Adjutant General to Governor of the State of Iowa, vol. 1 (Des Moines, IA, 1867), 89Google Scholar; andWarner, Ezra J., Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders (Baton Rouge, LA, 1992), 523–24Google Scholar.
28 For, Vandever's case, see Congressional Globe, 37th Cong., 2nd sess. (May 8, 1862), 2021–23, and 37th Cong., 3rd sess. (Jan. 20–21, Feb. 5, 14, 1863), 403–07, 427–34, 742–43, 963–71.Google Scholar
29 In the prewar and war years, Vandever and Allison were rivals as much as allies. SeeSage, Leland, William Boyd Allison: A Study in Practical Politics (Iowa City, 1956), 42–60.Google Scholar
30 Dubuque Daily Times, Aug. 24, 1865.
31 According to Vandever, an 1867 mining swindle had left him indebted; see Vandever to T. W. Burdick, Dec. 5, 1877, folder Dec. 1877, box 7, Vandever Papers. He also complained of expenses and of his failure to get ahead financially; see Vandever to William B. Allison, Nov. 27, 1873, folder 3, vol. 2, and Jan. 24, 1878, folder 2, vol. 12, William Boyd Allison Papers, State Historical Society of Iowa Library and Archives, Des Moines.
32 For overviews, see for exampleNichols, Roger L., Indians in the United States and Canada: A Comparative History (Lincoln, NE, 1998)Google Scholar;Bowden, Henry Warner, American Indians and Christian Missions: Studies in Cultural Conflict (Chicago, 1981)Google Scholar; andPrucha, Francis Paul, The Indians in American Society: From the Revolutionary War to the Present (Berkeley, 1985)Google Scholar.
33 For a critical synthesis of the military conflict between whites and Indians, seeUtley, Robert M., The Indian Frontier of the American West, 1846–1890 (Albuquerque, NM, 1984).Google Scholar
34 Grant, Ulysses S., “First Inaugural Address,” Mar. 4, 1869Google Scholar, Avalon Project, Yale Law School, http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/presiden/inaug/grant1.htm (accessed July 11, 2007).
35 See, Prucha, The Great Father, 485–96Google Scholar; quotations 491–92.
36 Twain, Mark, Roughing It, vol. 2 of The Works of Mark Twain, ed. Rodgers, Franklin and Baender, Paul (Berkeley, 1972), 146.Google Scholar
37 , Prucha, The Great Father, 481Google Scholar.
39 , Sim, “The Peace Policy,” 257.Google Scholar
40 The initial list of denominations was created in 1870 by Vincent Colyer, secretary of the BIC. In 1872, the white Protestant denominations were the northern Baptists, Congregationalists, Dutch Reformed, Episcopal, Evangelical Lutheran, Friends (Hicksite and Orthodox), northern Methodists, and northern Presbyterians. See, Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 32–36, 218–22.Google Scholar
41 , Prucha, The Great Father, 519.Google Scholar
42 Ibid., 562.
43 The legal status of Indian nations as “wards” and “domestic, dependent” nations under U.S. federal sovereignty was established byMarshall, Chief Justice John and the U.S. Supreme Court in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 1831.Google Scholar
44 , Stuart, The Indian Office, 73–80.Google Scholar
45 Quotation is from U.S. Indian Bureau, A Compilation from the Revised Statutes of the United States, 2nd ed. (Washington, 1876), 16. The summation of duties is from a two-page document, folder 6, box 3, Vandever Papers.
46 The number of inspectors was decreased to three in 1875, then increased back to five in 1880; see, Stuart, The Indian Office, 77.Google Scholar
47 On Smith, seeCrawford, Richard C., “Edward Parmalee Smith (1873–75)” in Kvasnicka, and Viola, , Commissioners of Indian Affairs, 141–47.Google Scholar
48 U.S. Office of Indian Affairs, Registers of Letters Received, 1824–1880, rolls 95–108, microform M18, NARA, Rocky Mountain Region, Denver. Supplemented by the Vandever Papers, these records provide the outline of Vandever's inspection tours between 1873 and 1878.
49 Vandever to CIA, Sept. 25; Oct. 1; Oct. 5; Oct. 13; Nov. 4; Nov. 5, 1873, in U.S. Office of Indian Affairs, Reports of the Field Jurisdictions, 1873–1900, roll 1, microform M1070, Arizona Superintendency, NARA, Denver.
50 Vandever to CIA, Nov. 3; Nov. 4, 1873, in OIA, Reports of the Field Jurisdictions, roll 1.
51 Vandever to CIA, Oct. 18, 1873, in OIA, Reports of the Field Jurisdictions, roll 1.
52 Tinker, George E., Missionary Conquest: The Gospel and Native American Cultural Genocide (Minneapolis, 1993).Google Scholar
53 , Stuart, The Indian Office, 108–09.Google Scholar
54 U.S. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Annual Report for the Year (Washington, 1875 82.Google Scholar
55 Benson, Todd, “The Consequences of Valley Reservation, Pacific Historical 1871–1884,” Pacific Historical Review 60 (May 1991): 225–27, 235–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
56 Vandever to CIA, Reports of the Field Jurisdictions, roll 3, California superintendency.
57 Vandever, William, Report of William Vandever, United States Indian Inspector (Washington, 1876), 5, 6.Google Scholar
58 On the Sioux Commission of 1875, see, Sage, William Boyd Allison, 139–40Google Scholar; andLarson, Robert W., Red Cloud: Warrior-Statesman of the Lakota Sioux (Norman, OK, 1997), 188–95Google Scholar.
59 Vandever to Allison, Aug. 31, 1875, folder 2, vol. 6, Allison Papers.
60 On the White House secret meeting, see, Larson, Red Cloud, 196–98Google Scholar. On John Q. Smith, see Edward E. Hill, “John Q. Smith (1875–77)” in, Kvasnicka and , Viola, Commissioners of Indian Affairs, 149–53Google Scholar. Military control of Indian affairs—known as “the transfer issue”—was a heated policy topic in U.S. politics from 1867 into 1879; see, Prucha, The Great Father, 549–60Google Scholar, and, Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 191–93Google Scholar.
61 , Larson, Red Cloud, 199–200Google Scholar;Robinson, Charles M. III , General Crook and the Western Frontier (Norman, OK, 2001), 169–72Google Scholar.
62 Vandever, William, Report on Affairs at Red Cloud and Spotted Tail Agencies (Washington, 1876), 4Google Scholar; Vandever to CIA, Sept. 8, 1875, OIA, Reports of the Field Jurisdictions, roll 3, Cheyenne [River] Agency.
63 , Vandever, Report on Affairs at Red Cloud, 1, 6, 7.Google Scholar
64 , Vandever, Report on Affairs at Red Cloud, 8, 9, 10–11, 12.Google Scholar
65 Vandever, William, Report Relating to Disposition of Indians at Red Cloud and Spotted Tail Agencies (Washington, 1876), 7, 8.Google Scholar
66 , Vandever, Report Relating to Disposition, 9, 10–11, 12.Google Scholar
67 Notations about Vandever, Aug. 18, Sept. 6, Sept. 8, 1876, in OIA, Registers of Letters Received, roll 107.
68 On the Manypenny Commission, see, Larson, Red Cloud, 205–06Google Scholar, and, Prucha, The Great Father, 632–33Google Scholar. On Manypenny, seeFritz, Henry E., foreword to Our Indian Wards, by Manypenny, George W. (1880; New York, 1972), xiiiGoogle Scholar. On Whipple, see, Tinker, Missionary Conquest, 95–111Google Scholar.
69 Boston Daily Advertiser, Feb. 25, 1869, in, Mardock, Reformers and the American Indian, 50.Google Scholar
70 , Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 191–93.Google Scholar
71 Waltmann, “Circumstantial Reformer,” 333–36, 338–40; Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 46–71, 92–97, 189–91.
72 Vandever to Condict, Jan. 4, 1877, folder 2, box 7, Vandever Papers.
73 See Berkhofer, The White Man's Indian, andDeloria, Philip J., Playing Indian (New Haven, 1998).Google Scholar
74 In addition to strict civilian control of San Carlos, Clum also wanted a salary increase, since he was recently married; Anderson, “Protestantism, Progress, and Prosperity,” 325–26, 329. On San Carlos, seeHarte, John Bret, “The San Carlos Indian Reservation, 1872–1886: An Administrative History” (PhD diss., University of Arizona, 1972).Google Scholar
75 Vandever to CIA, May 20, 1877, folder May 1877, box 7, Vandever Papers.
76 Vandever to CIA, May 20, May 25, June 1, 1877; Vandever to George W. Manypenny, June 24, 1877; Vandever to Allison, June 28, 1877, folders May, June 1877, box 7, Vandever Papers.
77 On the transitions in federal Indian affairs, seeDavison, Kenneth E., “President Hayes and the Reform of American Indian Policy,” Ohio History 82 (Summer–Autumn 1973): 205–14Google Scholar;, Prucha, The Great Father, 556–60, 585–97Google Scholar;Hoogenboom, Ari, The Presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes (Lawrence, KS, 1988), 153–71.Google ScholarOn the Clum-Kautz feud, see Harte, “The San Carlos Indian Reservation,” 372–73.
78 Vandever to CIA, Aug. 6, Aug. 15 (denial of pamphlet), 1877, folder Aug. 1877, box 7, Vandever Papers.
79 Schurz to CIA, Sept. 6, 1877, folder Sept. 1877, box 7, Vandever Papers.
80 Schurz also reprimanded Vandever over a debt about which a complaint had been made; Schurz to Vandever, Nov. 30, 1877. Vandever's fears appear in his letters to Commissioner Hayt on Nov. 16 and to Senator Allison on Dec. 4, 1877, folders Nov. 1877 and Papers of “special interest,” box 7, Vandever Papers. Vandever's correspondence with Allison once his non-reappointment was clear include Jan. 17 (telegram); Jan. 19; Jan. 21 (telegram); Jan. 24; Jan. 28, 1878, folders 2–3, vol. 12, Allison Papers. Quotations are from Allison to Vandever, Jan. 19, 1878 and Feb. 1, 1878, folders Jan., Feb. 1878, box 8, Vandever Papers.
81 Vandever to Allison, Jan. 24, Feb. 5, 1878, folders 2, 4, vol. 12, Allison Papers.
82 Bancroft, Frederic and Dunning, William A., eds., The Reminiscences of Carl Schurz, vol. 3, 1863–1869 with a Sketch of His Life and Public Services from 1869 to 1906 (New York, 1908), 377–90.Google Scholar
83 , Keller, Protestantism and Indian Policy, 194–96.Google Scholar
84 William Vandever, “Draft of an Indian Article”; “Rough Draft of Indian Article for Moravian Missionary Society Aug–1881”; Untitled and undated draft article; “Objections to transfer of Indians to War Department”; collected in 19 pp. annotated typescript of mss., ed. Joel L. Samuels, Vandever Papers.
85 Hoxie, A Final Promise, andPrucha, Francis Paul, ed., Americanizing the American Indians: Writings by the “Friends of the Indian,” 1880–1900 (1973; Lincoln, NE, 1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
86 , Baur, “William Vandever,” 14, 16–17.Google Scholar
87 Vandever, untitled and undated draft article, 12.
88 Congressional Record, 51st Cong., 2nd sess. (Dec. 10, 1890), 310–11.
89 Limerick, Patricia Nelson, Something in the Soil: Legacies and Reckonings in the New West (New York, 2000), 63, 73.Google Scholar