The U.S Was Justified in Their Actions Leading up to and During the Nez Perce War.
Many people learning about Native Americans believe that the settlers were unfair and cruel to the Native Americans. But what if everything they did was legal, logical, and for the good of the many? What if the Native Americans were the ones who were cruel to the settlers? In this essay, we’ll be exploring the reasons and emotions behind the Nez Perce attacks on settlers, the legalism of the settlers manifest destiny, and the Nez Perce’s rejection of the peaceful treaties. First off, the Nez Perce weren’t very peaceful to the settlers. Over 6,596 settlers were killed by Native Americans, which was around 31% of their population (wikipedia.com)! Many settlers were killed when tried to peacefully negotiate with angry tribes. Also, on the first Nez Perce reservation, 12-16 settlers were killed by 3 Nez Perce, who then fled (indian-ed.org). While it’s not 100% confirmed that the
…show more content…
Since the Nez Perce refused to sign the original treaty, they got stuck with the not-as-great deal. The original treaty promised that “...it shall be lawful for (the Nez Perce) to reside upon any ground not in the actual claim and occupation of citizens of the U.S and upon any ground claimed or occupied, if with the permission of the owner or claimant…” (Nez Perce Treaty). If the Nez Perce had signed the treaty, they would have still owned some of their original land, and they would have had the freedom to live elsewhere, too. Some people might say that the treaty had other, not so great terms too. For example, “The said Nez Perce tribe of indians hereby cede, relinquish, and convey to the United States all their right, title, and interest in and to the country occupied or claimed by them…”. But, that was the second treaty. If they had signed the original treaty, it probably wouldn’t have included that
The Manifest Destiny Effect and the Nez Perce In the mid 19th century Americans believed it was their duty to permeate the U.S. boundaries and into western territory. Not only did they believe it their duty as an American, but their divine right to obtain these lands. This is known as manifest destiny, “a future event accepted as inevitable” (Merriam-Webster). At the very heart of manifest destiny, was an obtuse belief in the supremacy of whites.
In 1855 the Nez Perce signed a treaty with the United States concerning what land was theirs. In the Treaty, the United States gave the Nez Perce about 7.7 million acres for
Albert Einstein once said “insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” The Nez Perce had something to the same affect for instance, trusting the Europeans with treaties and being let down once then over again. Trading with the Europeans even if they deemed them unsuitable to keep land. In essence, the reason the Nez Perces were led to their demise is because of the continuation of trust between them and the whites who arrived in the Northwest moreover, how the Nez Perces stayed in a relationship with them. A relationship that was full of curiosity, misunderstanding and miscommunication that showed how it slowly went from choice to control for the Nez Perce.
The existence of tribal sovereignty over hundreds of years has sparked the assimilation that the doctrine of American Indians is not only a lawful perception, but also an essential component that defines the evolution of our country. Tribal sovereignty addresses the right for tribes to govern themselves (Internet citation) and for them to mandate their property and their land’s decisions, but if so is the case, why have infinite number of tribes been removed from their territories? Without a doubt, this paper will explore and argue how our country has been affected because of unfair laws and policies that have unreasonably been established to tribes. In order to justify this argument, I will discuss the concerns revolving the Doctrine Discovery,
Throughout the seventeenth century, conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was rampant and constant. As more and more Europeans migrated to America, violence became increasingly consistent. This seemingly institutionalized pattern of conflict begs a question: Was conflict between Europeans and Native Americans inevitable? Kevin Kenny and Cynthia J. Van Zandt take opposing sides on the issue. Kevin Kenny asserts that William Penn’s vision for cordial relations with local Native Americans was destined for failure due to European colonists’ demands for privately owned land.
During the early to mid 1800s, the colonization of “Indians” and subordination of “women’s rights in the American society,” was very essential to those in authority. They were perceived as a mere means to an end by promises of a better life in exchange for “land and work.” Although locals complied, those in offices took advantage by using antagonistic tactics in achieving wealth, power, and ownership. However, these actions lead to “The First Seminole War, The Monroe Doctrine, Andrew Jackson’s leadership, The Indian Removal Act, The California Gold Rush, The Seneca Falls Convention, and the Birth of the Republican Party.” Although some Americans have been perceived as heroes, their actions have said otherwise about their character.
Chief Joseph feared retaliation by the government and tried to take his people to safety. They got captured and the Nez Perce moved to Kansas, but the fearless leader never gave up. In 1877 the Nez Pierce were ordered to special land reserved for Native Americans. The Nez Pierce ddnt want to go. Instead, Chief Joseph tried to lead 800 of his people to Canada.
The United States sent armies into the Native American lands, mistreating the Native Americans, and caused trouble against them by sparkling conflicts and wars. “It is not, of course, to be understood that the government of the United States is at the mercy of Indians; but thousands of its citizens are, even thousands of families. Their exposed situation on the extreme verge of settlement affords a sufficient justification to the government for buying off the hostility of the Savages, excited and exasperated as they are…by the invasion of their hunting grounds and the threatened extinction of their game.” (Document 4) The United States government introduced policies for Native Americans to have a better life, but in fact, they kept them in
Manifest destiny was the belief in which America was destined to expand through the entire continent. Tragically, hidden behind this God-driven and rightful duty, America tried to justify their violent and cruel actions towards Native Americans. Under religious purposes and political principles, the United States erroneously justified the brutal treatment done to the first inhabitants of America. Immorally Americans felt superior and filled with pride they became blinded to the pain of their neighbors. The government unlawfully took their lands and forced them to leave what belonged to them.
This relinquished nearly 7 million acres of land and reserved only 785,000 acres for the Nez Perce. The group that signed this treaty is called the “treaty Nez Perce.” Fifty-one Nez Perce signed the treaty, and it is important to note that none of those signing lost any land. This represented High Chief (appointed so by the U.S. government and not by his tribe)
If Native Americans were not compliant, Americans would murder them. Although Manifest Destiny was seen as an inevitable movement among Americans and resulted in the formation of the American West in the Nineteenth century, it was truthfully an act of invasion and subjugation against peoples who had settled the land for hundreds of years earlier. Manifest Destiny led to an obvious upsurge in racial
Historians who practice historiography agree that the writings from the beginning of what is now known as the United States of America can be translated various ways. In James H. Merrell’s “The Indians’ New World,” the initial encounters and relationships between various Native American tribes and Europeans and their African American slaves are explained; based on Merrell’s argument that after the arrival of Europeans to North America in 1492, not only would the Europeans’ lives drastically change, but a new world would be created for the Native Americans’ as their communities and lifestyles slowly intertwined for better or worse. Examples of these changes include: “deadly bacteria, material riches, and [invading] alien people.” (Merrell 53)
Have you ever been forced to do something? If so, you and the Natives have something in common. Manifest Destiny and Westward Expansion was mutually beneficial to the U.S because they gained land from Mexicans which was Texas and then gained land from the French which is also known as the Louisiana purchase but the Natives were heavily impacted by the Westward Expansion and Manifest Disney because the U.S wanted more land and Native lands was in the west but the U.S wanted to expand west so the they could have a bigger population. The Natives also had to fight for their land but not only the Natives had to fight the U.S and Mexicans troops also had to fight each other to maintain their land but a lot of U.S and Mexians died due to the war. Some people think that Manifest Destiny And Westward Expansion was helpful to the Indians also called the Natives because Manifest Destiny was a phase that people believe that god was trying to expanded more land and Westward Expansion was when the U.S expanded west so Natives thought they would have more land
The Nez Perce refused to sign the agreement that said they would give their land to the government and they said that they were not bothering anyone. However, the settlers did not like Native Americans and accused the Nez Perce of stealing horses and killing their farm animals. Soon after, White Bird attacked the fort and won the battle. In retaliation, the Union attacked the Nez Perce’s allies. As a result, the Nez Perce ran with their fellow allies to an area in Montana that is now known as Yellowstone.
In Life Among the Piutes, sarah winnemucca hopkins describes what happens when soldiers came to their reservation based off what white settlers tell the government. The most shocking instance of this happened when Winnemucca encountered a group of soldier who told her the white settlers accused the natives of stealing cattle, “the soldiers rode up to their [meaning the Piute’s] encampment and fired into it, and killed almost all the people that were there… after the soldiers had killed but all bur some little children and babies… the soldiers took them too… and set the camp on fire and threw them into the flames to see them burned alive”(78). This is an abhorrent act that is unthinkable in a functioning society. The natives had done nothing but want to hold some shred of land from the settlers who had taken everything from them and are exterminated like vermin. This was something that stayed hidden from many white settlers because of its barbarism and by exposing it Winnemucca truly educates the reader, past and present, on how natives are