Wednesday, April 18, 2012

The Apache and American Relationship

            The relationship between the Apache tribe and the United States government would have started when the U.S. obtained what is today the American Southwest in the mid-1800s following the Mexican-American War.  Due to the lack of understanding of the Apaches, the U.S. began to suppress the tribe both culturally and militaristically.  This would lead to armed conflicts between the two, known as the Apache Wars.  The conflicts would reach their high point in the last half of the nineteenth century and would come to an end with Geronimo’s surrender in 1886.  For the Apaches that were not killed during the period, life would be subject to either imprisonment in different parts of the United States or a deprived living on a reservation (D.L. 105).  The relationship between the two was extremely tumultuous during the period and would never truly come to a mutual understanding. 
The Apaches were known as a “warrior culture” and would illustrate that very reputation to the American military through various uprisings across the Southwest.  The United States would have more campaigns and come into more conflicts with this particular tribe than any other.  There would be at least 214 battles with the U.S. Army and over 500 casualties (Gregory 363).  In many cases, the various militia groups in the American Southwest would enlist the aid of members of other Native American tribes as scouts, especially during campaigns in the 1870s.  Pueblo Indians would be a primary resource for the U.S. government in subduing the Apaches (Albert 213-5).  The most intense fighting would occur during the 1880s prior to the capture of Geronimo.  One of the leading generals would even comment on how the Apache people were one of the most “difficult to suppress” and that it was “impossible with troops to catch the raiding parties” (Albert 224-5).
            There are numerous accounts of the Apache and their hostilities found in early settlers’ journals and government records from the period.  Many of these documents showcase the Apache people as bloodthirsty and barbaric.  Points of their “depredations and destruction of life” are highlighted with comments such as they had nearly killed “all” early pioneers and how “every industry and enterprise [had] been paralyzed” because of them (Arizona 3).  Affidavits describing the Apaches as “savages” and “hostile” can be found in every southwestern states’ legislature libraries.  Due to the promise of the government and the idea of Manifest Destiny, the pioneers truly believed that the Apaches were on their God-given land and pleaded with the government to step in and return the public domain that was so rightfully theirs.  References to how the Apaches had lived there for centuries hardly ever came up. 
It is not uncommon for government documents to go on for tens of pages with various affidavits discussing the horrifying atrocities committed by the Apaches.  Samuel Hughes, a clerk from Tucson discusses how two acquaintances, “‘Newton Israel and Hugh Kennedy were killed; two wagons loaded with merchandise, and seven mules were taken at the same time; the bodies of the men were badly mutilated and one of them burned; that life and property are unsafe on the public roads” (Arizona 8).  This one account demonstrates the Apaches not only as murderers, but also thieves and mutilators.  John C. Cremony, an interpreter to the U.S. Boundary Commission, further paints the Apache as a highly intelligent and conniving people.  He discusses how the Apaches only visit American camps for sinister reasons.  They are there pretending to beg only as reconnaissance.  “Their keen eyes omit nothing.  One’s arms and equipments, the number of your party, their cohesion and precaution…their system of defense in case of attack, and the amount of [possible] plunder” (John 79).  With countless examples of such violence creating hysteria across the nation, it was just a matter of time before the government would officially step in and put a stop to it.  There are also numerous stories in Arizona alone detailing the Apache warriors raiding farms taking all they could and destroying the rest.  Scalping and reports of the Indians kidnapping women and girls were all commonplace.   It was the destruction of Anglo-Americans’ livelihoods and the assault on their sense of safety that truly pushed for the government involvement.  With these acts being committed, there was of course no regard for the Apaches’ rights because they were perceived as less than human by many.  This led to extremely strained relationships, and many Anglos believed the only answer lied in the destruction of the people.
            Court cases for captured Apaches were also all but fair.  The criminal justice system was governed by Anglo-Americans that in many cases considered the Apaches to be a threat to their way of life.  Also, juries only ever consisted of white men that also fell in the above category.  Whites also considered Apaches as “social misfits” due to the fact they were of a different culture and spoke a distinctive language.  Due to this lack of understanding, one can easily see how Apaches could not receive a fair trial.  There are plenty of examples to show that jurors were more lenient with their verdicts on similar crimes when it came to white defendants rather than an Apache.  One case that demonstrates the inequalities the Apaches were faced with is U.S. v. Captain Jack.  Captain Jack was an Apache accused of murder of another Indian on tribal lands.  Everyone involved in his trial was white, and he could not even speak English.  He also had no understanding of the U.S. judicial process.  In addition to the argument that this should have been a tribal issue, Captain Jack was forced to go through a trial.  He was found guilty in the first trial, but it would be eventually overturned due to the fact the case was handled under the wrong jurisdiction.  Captain Jack would face other indictments before it was all said and done (Clare 32-5, 57).  There are numerous cases that ended in convictions of Apache men that were on trial.  This only further illustrates the unequal treatment and harsh relations the Apache people had with the state and national governments. 
            To better understand the relationship that would eventually foster between the Apaches and the United States, one does need to recall that the Apaches were of a warrior culture.  They were trained for war from early on in their childhoods and raiding was a key part of that training.  Raiding was also essential to the tribe’s survival in many cases.  They were also family-oriented so an attack on one was an attack on the entire tribe.  This became quite evident as more and more pioneers settled into the territory killing many of the Apaches they would come into contact with.  Their skills became truly legendary to the American military men that would constantly fight them.  General George Crook referred to the Apaches as the “‘tigers of the human race’”, while others had comments such as, “‘the thought of attempting to catch one of them in the mountains gave me a queer feeling of helplessness’” (Jason 126-7). 
At this time, extermination was the American policy toward the Apache tribe.  This policy would not so hastily leave the whites of the region even when President Grant tried to implement a policy geared towards peace in 1870.  Citizens of Tucson would end up massacring a group of peaceful Apache women and children in 1871.  Grant appointed General George Crook to prevent future cases of such events, but the whites that committed the atrocity essentially went without punishment.  The Apaches would of course later seek revenge (Jason 145).  This illustrates both the altering policy of the U.S. toward the Apaches, and the general picture of how the Apaches were being treated by the dominant society.  The relationship between the two also became more strained once certain groups were placed on reservations.  Besides the mere fact that the Apaches were being cheated by the military on their ration allotments, the rations for the tribes were in the first place were less than what was needed to survive.  The government was cheating them at every point, even by lying on the weight of cows they were issuing to the Apaches (Odie 40-2).  The agents of the Indian Bureau were also seen as extremely corrupt and were said to have “caused more misery and loss of life than all other causes combined” (Odie 44).  In response, outbreaks against the U.S. military by the Apache began to become common.  The government would soon respond with more troops and harsher penalties against the law breakers.
            At this point, one begins to see the ambiguous views of soldiers and government officials concerning the Apache question.  Mr. W.H.H. Llewellyn, a civilian in from Arizona, discusses that he wishes for the fair treatment of the Apaches and that the government should do the best they could for them, but he does not want the Apaches to be moved back into his region.  Mr. Llewellyn still believes the Apaches still present some danger to the whites in the Southwest.  Others, such General Crook and General Miles, disagree and hope for the Apaches to be taken back to reservations in the Southwest (U.S. “Removal…”).  Lieutenant Howard also recommended for the Apaches to be taken back to Arizona and be given land and farming equipment.  He also wants them to have the rights to the land they are given.  He goes further to say that it would be “criminal” of the government to keep the Apaches away from their land any longer (U.S. Senate “Message…”).
            The government would eventually set up reservations for the Apaches throughout the American Southwest.  The surrender of Geronimo in 1886 was the inevitable signal of the U.S. triumph over the Apache people.  They longer had no choice but to give in to what the U.S. saw as fit.  The Apache people would continue to be subject to the injustices and inequalities of the U.S. policy.  They would not even receive American citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 (D.L. 108).



PREZI

                                                             
Primary Sources

Arizona Legislative Assembly, “Memorial and Affidavits Showing Outrages Perpetrated by the Apache Indians in the Territory of Arizona for the Years 1869 and 1870,” (San Francisco:  Francis & Valentine Printers, 1871); http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/ Sabin?dd=0&locID=stil74078&d1=SABCPA8394400&srchtp=a&c=1&an=SABCPA8394400&d2=3&docNum=CY3808153217&h2=1&af=RN&d6=3&ste=10&dc=tiPG&stp=Author&d4=0.33&d5=d6&ae=CY108153215 (accessed February 6, 2012)
           
John C. Cremony, Life Among the Apaches 1850-1868, (New Mexico:  The Rio Grande Press, Inc., 1868)
           
United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, “Indian Wars and Local Disturbances in the United States, 1782-1898,” (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1921)
             
United States House of Representatives, “Difficulties with Indian tribes. Message from the President of the United States in answer to a resolution of the House of the 7th ultimo, asking for information relative to difficulties with various tribes of Indians,” (April 6, 1870); http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/Digital?p_action=doc&p_ theme= sset2&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=SERIAL&p_text_direct-0=document_id=%28%2010A33E865034CDC0%20%29&p_nbid= A5EJ57YUMTMyODgyMTM3OS4xOTk4NDg6MToxMjoxMzkuNzguMy4yMzk&p_docref= (accessed February 6, 2012)
           
United States Senate, “Message from the President of the United States, Transmitting a Letter of the Secretary of War and reports Touching the Apache Indians at Governor's Island,” (January 20, 1890); http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/Digital?p_ action= doc&p_theme=sset2&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=SERIAL&p_text_direct-0=document_id=%28%201107C58E64FA00E0%20%29& p_nbid=H55N4EVLMTMyODgyMzk2OS42MTU1MTU6MToxMjoxMzkuNzguMy4yMzk&p_docref= (accessed February 6, 2012)
           
United States House Committee on Indian Affairs, “Removal of the Apache Indian Prisoners,” (February, 10, 1890); Microform, call number: CIS Hrgs MF Gp 4--(51) HIn-1
           

Secondary Sources

Albert H. Schroeder, The Changing Ways of Southwestern Indians:  A Historic Perspective, (New Mexico:  The Rio Grande Press, Inc., 1973)
           
Claire V. McKanna Jr., The White Justice in Arizona:  Apache Murder Trials in the Nineteenth Century, (Lubbock:  Texas Tech University Press, 2005)
           
D.L. Birchfield, The Encyclopedia of North American Indians, (New York:  Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 1997) 

Gregory Michno, Encyclopedia of Indian Wars: Western Battles and Skirmishes, 1850-1890, (Missoula: Mountain Press Publishing Co., 2003)
Jason Hook and Martin Pegler, To Live and Die in the West:  The Frontier Wars 1860-1890, (Oxford:  Osprey Publishing, 1999)
           
Odie B. Faulk, The Geronimo Campaign, (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1969)
           

             

No comments:

Post a Comment