Abe Lincoln No Friend of Native Americans...

Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#1
Abe Lincoln policies were not friendly to Native Americas: There were massacres and death marches under his watch... this is a brief overview of his indian policies...

Snippet:

https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/janfeb-2013/lincoln-no-hero-to-native-americans/

The Emancipation Proclamation was in many ways a tremendous step forward for human rights, but it didn’t bring any new rights to Native Americans.

In fact, Abraham Lincoln is not seen as much of a hero at all among many American Indian tribes and Native peoples of the United States, as the majority of his policies proved to be detrimental to them. For instance, the Homestead Act and the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 helped precipitate the construction of the transcontinental railroad, which led to the significant loss of land and natural resources, as well as the loss of lifestyle and culture, for many tribal people. In addition, rampant corruption in the Indian Office, the precursor of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, continued unabated throughout Lincoln’s term and well beyond. In many cases, government-appointed Indian agents outright stole resources that were supposed to go to the tribes.

In other cases, the Lincoln administration simply continued to implement discriminatory and damaging policies, like placing Indians on reservations. Beginning in 1863, the Lincoln administration oversaw the removal of the Navajos and the Mescalero Apaches from the New Mexico Territory, forcing the Navajo to march 450 miles to Bosque Redondo—a brutal journey. Eventually, more than 2,000 died before a treaty was signed.

Several massacres of Indians also occurred under Lincoln’s watch. For example, the Dakota War in Minnesota in 1862 led to the hanging of thirty-eight Indian men—303 Indian men had been sentenced to hang, but the others were spared by Lincoln’s pardon. The Sand Creek Massacre in southeastern Colorado in 1864 also resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Cheyenne and Arapaho.

On a more positive note, Pueblo leaders received silver-headed ebony canes in 1863 engraved with Lincoln’s name to symbolize their sovereignty. These canes are still revered and used for ceremonial purposes today.

W. Dale Mason describes Lincoln’s policy toward Native Americans in his essay “The Indian Policy of Abraham Lincoln.” “President Lincoln … continued the policy of all previous presidents of viewing Indian as wards of the government while at the same time negotiating with them as sovereigns,” Mason writes. “He made no revolutionary change in Indian-white relations as he did in black-white relations with the Emancipation Proclamation. While he called for reform of the Indian system in his last two Annual Messages to Congress, he provided no specifics and he continued the policy, already in place, of confining Indians to reservations after negotiating treaties.”

What’s clear is that the Emancipation Proclamation did not end discrimination against Native Americans. There are many wounds that still need to be healed.

 

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#2
Here is the Navajos story of extinction: Bosque Redondo memorial...

https://www.bosqueredondomemorial.com/

https://www.bosqueredondomemorial.com/friends.htm

Much has been written about the history and events of Bosque Redondo and the incarceration of 9000 Navajos and 500 Mescalero Apaches on the reservation at Fort Sumner between 1863 and 1868. Below are brief summaries of the important key events that wrote the history of Bosque Redondo as well as the triumphant reemergence of the Navajo Nation and the Mescalero Apache Tribe of today. Click on any of the topics below to learn more:

Snippets...

Having completed the surrender and exile of the Mescalero Apache, General Carleton turned his attention to solving the “Navajo problem” and again enlisted the help of Colonel Kit Carson. On June 15, 1863, Carleton issued the order to Carson to attack the Navajo “...until it is considered at these headquarters that they have been effectively punished for their long continued atrocities.”


During the winter of 1863-1864, Carson’s New Mexico Volunteers, aided by Indian scouts and informants, ravaged the Navajo countryside, killing Navajo, burning crops and orchards, killing livestock, destroying villages, and contaminating water sources. This ‘scorched earth’ campaign of Carson’s “designed to starve the Navajo into submission” would be aptly called by the Navajos “The Fearing Time.”

Between the summer of 1863 and December 1866 nearly 10,500 Navajos were besieged by U.S. Military troops, led by Col. Christopher “Kit” Carson, starved into submission, forced to surrender, and marched to Bosque Redondo. Over 2,000 Navajos perished on what is known as “The Long Walk” and during their time of incarceration and suffering at Bosque Redondo, until their release in 1868, known as “Hweeldi.”

58083.jpg
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#3
Here is found this where Lincoln meets with some of the Plains Indian chiefs... There or photos of the Indians but not of Lincoln with the Indian chiefs...

https://www.whitehousehistory.org/photographs-of-indian-delegates-in-the-presidents-summer-house

Here are Lincoln's words to these Chiefs...

“It is the object of this Government to be on terms of peace with you and all our red brethren. We constantly endeavor to be so. We make treaties with you and will try to observe them” Lincoln continued, “The palefaced people are numerous and prosperous because they cultivate the earth, produce bread, and depend upon the products of the earth rather than wild game for a subsistence. This is the chief reason of the difference, but there is another. Although we are now engaged in a great war between one another, we are not, as a race,
so much disposed to fight and kill one another as our red brethren.”

Go to the link for the photos and story... some of the chiefs die in a massacre ...
 
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
8,541
Location
Upstate N.Y.
#4
Not condoning in any form the way Native Americans were treated, but conditions existed long before and even longer after Lincolns time as President. Why single out Lincoln as the villain? Were there no other voices in authority who could help resolve what went on for fifty odd years? Massacres happened on both sides.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
7,816
#6
What’s clear is that the Emancipation Proclamation did not end discrimination against Native Americans. There are many wounds that still need to be healed.
The Emancipation Proclamation didn't end discrimination against anyone.

Not condoning in any form the way Native Americans were treated, but conditions existed long before and even longer after Lincolns time as President. Why single out Lincoln as the villain? Were there no other voices in authority who could help resolve what went on for fifty odd years? Massacres happened on both sides.
Why let him off the hook? Because 'everyone did it?' That makes him right?

Yeah, massacres happened on both sides, but who showed up in whose neighborhood first and started it also matters.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2017
Messages
59
Location
Tallahassee, Florida
#8
I find it interesting as to how the author of this piece seems to imply that since Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation that it's surprising that his views on how to deal with the Indian tribes of the west were relatively in line with his predecessors and successors. I guess some people would just assume that the two would go hand in hand and would be legitimately surprised to read the truth as laid out by the author.

Make no mistake I don't Lincoln one bit, but trying to condemn him for his Indian policies just doesn't strike me as fair. He was more or less in step with the times he lived in. As the writer points out he wasn't a friend to the tribes, but he certainly wasn't a butcher when compared to others of his era. I could edit the first italicized quote to say "the Emancipation Proclamation was in many ways a tremendous step forward for human rights, but it didn’t bring any new rights to women" and then point out that while Lincoln was monumentally important in ending slavery he did practically nothing to advance women's suffrage or equality. It's true but why paint it as though given his views on black-white relations that it should be surprising? What's the supposed correlation?
 

wbull1

Sergeant
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
892
#9
After the first line: Several massacres of Indians also occurred under Lincoln’s watch. Comes: For example, the Dakota War in Minnesota in 1862 led to the hanging of thirty-eight Indian men—303 Indian men had been sentenced to hang, but the others were spared by Lincoln’s pardon. Was then his pardon of 87% of the accused a massacre? He was taken to task after the Republican Party lost seats in Congress from Minnesota. Angrily told he should have let more men hang Lincoln answered, "I would not trade hangings for votes."

How is that an example of Lincoln's evil behavior?
 

wbull1

Sergeant
Joined
Jul 26, 2018
Messages
892
#10
Was Lincoln present in New Mexico, Colorado and the site of other massacres or was he weeks or months distant in travel time? Was he whiling away his time with frivolities or was there another matter that took his attention? Inattentive? Guilty. Beyond that, I don't think so.
 

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
18,399
Location
Central Pennsylvania
#11
Wow. I'm sorry but it's becoming absurd, these reaches on Lincoln. First I heard he was somehow anti-women's rights on top of being personally responsible for what was done to Native Americans. Gee whiz.

You know, this blaming thing seems to me to be irresponsible. On a number of levels. Native Americans were systematically brutalized for as many years as it took to swipe their land. It a shameful chapter in our history and to use it as a stick to bludgeon Lincoln makes a tool of tragedy. That's one. It also neglects to share responsibility and ' teaches ' some form of history in which you can always find someone to blame. Dangerous. What an awful example for kids- showing them if you look around long enough it's possible to shuffle off responsibility- for anything.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#12
Lincoln was president. He is responsible for the action of his men in uniform. He lack respect for Indians...

The centerpiece of Lincoln’s presidency was the Civil War, but he also contended with Indian conflicts and genocide in the Midwest and Western frontiers, including the Sioux Uprising, the Sand Creek Massacre and wars with the Indians of the Southwest. Focused primarily on winning the war, Lincoln allowed army generals to dictate Indian policy.

He neglected his responsibility to control his men in uniform.

He again talks down to the Indian leaders...

Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsma...ull-of-contradictions-YujERMz8AkOl_Etug3JfIw/


Meanwhile, Lincoln entertained Indian delegates at the White House, where he sometimes lectured them about civilization.

“I really am not capable of advising you whether, in the providence of the Great Spirit, who is the great Father of us all, it is best for you to maintain the habits and customs of your race, or adopt a new mode of life,” he told Indian leaders in March 1863. “I can only say that I can see no way in which your race is to become as numerous and prosperous as the white race except by living as they do, by the cultivation of the earth.”

Again no respect for their culture...

In his third annual message to Congress, in December 1863, Lincoln urged Indians to reject tribal culture and embrace civilization, which included principles of Christianity.

“Sound policy and our imperative duty to these wards of the government demand our anxious and constant attention to their material well-being, to their progress in the arts of civilization, and, above all, to that moral training which under the blessing of Divine Providence will confer upon them the elevated and sanctifying influences, the hopes and consolations, of the Christian faith,” he said.
 
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
8,541
Location
Upstate N.Y.
#13
The Emancipation Proclamation didn't end discrimination against anyone.



Why let him off the hook? Because 'everyone did it?' That makes him right?

Yeah, massacres happened on both sides, but who showed up in whose neighborhood first and started it also matters.
There is no reference to Lincoln being a champion ( or non villain) for Native American rights in my statement. Only comment was where were the other Champions though out History. These problems did not start in 1860, but closer to 1700's. Native Americans were here long before the Mayflower landed. Treaties were made and broken from the very start.
To pick Lincoln as the source of the problem, one really has to stretch the imagination a long ways.
As to massacres one also has to go back to the 1700's. My own city (a stockade) in 1690 was burned to the ground and majority of people massacred. Also remember it was not just Americans involved. Lets not forget Spain / Mexico, France and England for bringing Slavery to America. And yes, even Native Americans who also made slaves out of other Tribe captures. Was any of it right or any one group or person responsible? Of course not, but to trying and pin the guilt trip on one person for whatever reason is equally not right.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Messages
27
#15
Yeah… I wrote three paragraphs in defense of Lincoln and laying out how his original views on slavery transformed into his final views on slavery, blah, blah, blah, but then I realized that the post simply points out to us one tried and true fact. One can be morally “on point” or close to it with one subject and have a dozen blind spots in reference to others.
 
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
8,541
Location
Upstate N.Y.
#16
Lincoln was president. He is responsible for the action of his men in uniform. He lack respect for Indians...

The centerpiece of Lincoln’s presidency was the Civil War, but he also contended with Indian conflicts and genocide in the Midwest and Western frontiers, including the Sioux Uprising, the Sand Creek Massacre and wars with the Indians of the Southwest. Focused primarily on winning the war, Lincoln allowed army generals to dictate Indian policy.

He neglected his responsibility to control his men in uniform.

He again talks down to the Indian leaders...

Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsma...ull-of-contradictions-YujERMz8AkOl_Etug3JfIw/


Meanwhile, Lincoln entertained Indian delegates at the White House, where he sometimes lectured them about civilization.

“I really am not capable of advising you whether, in the providence of the Great Spirit, who is the great Father of us all, it is best for you to maintain the habits and customs of your race, or adopt a new mode of life,” he told Indian leaders in March 1863. “I can only say that I can see no way in which your race is to become as numerous and prosperous as the white race except by living as they do, by the cultivation of the earth.”

Again no respect for their culture...

In his third annual message to Congress, in December 1863, Lincoln urged Indians to reject tribal culture and embrace civilization, which included principles of Christianity.

“Sound policy and our imperative duty to these wards of the government demand our anxious and constant attention to their material well-being, to their progress in the arts of civilization, and, above all, to that moral training which under the blessing of Divine Providence will confer upon them the elevated and sanctifying influences, the hopes and consolations, of the Christian faith,” he said.
Your first line states it all."Lincoln was president" , not God. If you recall, His plate was pretty full with a little problem called the Civil War. Again not saying any of this was right as there are also hundreds of examples in the Civil War alone.
A little thing known as History keeps track of all these occurrences through time.
Politicians have entertained friend and enemy from time immortal. Reading what you want into these meetings is up to you. What is wrong with assimilation? Keeping ones culture is fine, but when living peacefully together, some bending on both sides is a necessary evil.
Would you consider Jefferson Davis evil and the sole source of starting the Civil War and all the horrible things that happen in war? Of course not. Sure he played a part, but to hang all those horrible things on him is not fair or right.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#17
Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation
Lincoln did not free all the slaves the Cherokee slaves were not freed by the EP...

Following the US Emancipation Proclamation, the Cherokee National Council, consisting of Pro-Union Cherokee and headed by acting Principal Chief Thomas Pegg, passed two emancipation acts that freed all enslaved African Americans within the limits of the Cherokee Nation.


It the Cherokee two wacks to get their own EP right...

The first, "An Act Providing for the Abolition of Slavery in the Cherokee Nation", was passed on February 18, 1863.[29]

Be it enacted by the Natl Council, That in view of the difficulties and evils which have arisen from the Institution of Slavery and which seem inseparable from its existence in the Cherokee Nation, The Delegation appointed to proceed to Washington are impowered and instructed to assure the President of the U States of the desire of the Authorities and People to remove that Institution from the statures and Soil of the Cherokee Nation and of their wish to provide for that object at once upon the Principle of Compensation to the owners of Slaves not disloyal to the Government of the United States as tendered by Congress to States which shall abolish Slavery to their midst.

The second, "An Act Emancipating the Slaves in the Cherokee Nation", was passed on February 20, 1863.[30][31]

Be it enacted by the National Council: That all negro and other slaves within the lands of the Cherokee Nation be and they are hereby emancipated from slavery, and any person or persons who may have been held in slavery hereby declared to be forever free.

It took a treaty to end Slavery the Treaty of 1866... and then years of the Cherokee Freedmen Controversy

Inattentive? Guilty.
Lincoln supposedly knew he was guilty of neglect. Like many Lincoln tales, he died before he could save the day...

Aware of rampant government corruption during the Civil War, which often led to Indians’ starvation and suffering, Lincoln promised to remodel the Indian system. Urged by activists who pushed for the system to be overhauled, Lincoln replied, “If we get through the war and I live, this Indian system will be reformed.”

"Lincoln was president" , not God.
Our hero worship of Lincoln has made him a Myth, and a GOD!
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
7,155
Location
Central Florida
#20
It was a clergyman of the cloth that did as much as Lincoln to not hang 303 Sioux:

The Sioux had a rare friend, however, in Minnesota’s Episcopal bishop, Henry Whipple. The clergyman traveled to Washington and met with Lincoln, who was so impressed with Whipple’s account that he ordered that every case be re-examined on its own merits. After thorough analysis, only 38 Sioux could be proved to have participated in the uprising. Lincoln immediately approved their execution order, and commuted the sentences of the others. In a finish that is pure Lincoln, the president hand wrote the list of long, difficult, phonetically spelled Sioux names himself, and advised the telegrapher on the vital necessity of sending them correctly, lest the wrong men be hanged.

After the Sioux uprising Congress did this: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/lincoln-and-the-sioux/

The year after the uprising, Congress expunged all Sioux treaties from the record, took back their reservation and ordered that the entire tribe be expelled from Minnesota. As an incentive, a bounty of $25 was offered for the scalp of any Sioux found living in the state after the edict. There still was scattered resistance, but the Dakota War was over. The Sioux would continue to fight for years to come, until 1890, when the Army marked paid to their account by massacring at least 150 men, women and children from the tribe at Wounded Knee.

As far as I know Lincoln would have had to sign that bill into law...
 



Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top