Following the Revolutionary War, Indian nations had to deal with a new country and relationships were very different than before. From an Indian viewpoint, the new republic was not just another foreign colonial power, and it was not the same as the European colonial powers. The formation of the United States began a new chapter in cultural imperialism, racism, and genocide. The political and governmental policies which would guide the newly formed United States regarding American Indian nations were established by the Constitution and the actions of the first presidential administration under George Washington.
In the period following the Revolutionary War, there was much spirited debate over both the form of the new government and its dealings with Indians. Many people felt that a monarchy was the only logical form of government as it had been established by the Christian god, while others noted the many American Indian representational democracies, such as that of the Iroquois Confederation, which seemed to function well. In the end, inspired by the Iroquois, a representational form of democracy was chosen.
There were, however, many who felt that there should be no Indian nations within the United States; some who argued for segregation of Indians on reservations; some who sought the extermination of all Indians; some who felt that Indians could be Christianized and assimilated; and many who felt that Indians should have no legal rights. In his book American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies at the Founding of the Republic, historian Joseph Ellis writes:
“But all the principal founders acknowledged that the indigenous people of North America had a legitimate claim to the soil and a moral claim on the conscience of the infant republic. This is another problem, like slavery, that either failed to engage the creative energies of the founders in their fullest form, or was inherently insoluble.”
Education professor David Wallace Adams, in his book Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, sums it up this way:
“In the main, the policy issue could be reduced to this fact: Indians possessed the land, and whites wanted the land.”
He goes on to point out:
“For early policymakers, then, a major priority was the creation of a mechanism and rationale for divesting Indians of their real estate.”
The Constitution
The Constitution of the United States was adopted in 1787. The relationship between the government and Indian nations is outlined in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 which delegates to Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” This means that dealings with the Indian nations are to be federal. Anthropologist Robert Bee, in his chapter in The Pequots in Southern New England: The Fall and Rise of an American Indian Nation, writes:
“The creators of the federal Constitution made it clear that the federal government—not the states—should control relations with Indian tribes.”
In their book The Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears, Theda Perdue and Michael Green write:
“It defined congressional action as superior to state law and granted Congress the exclusive authority to regulate commerce with the tribes.”
Legal historians Vine Deloria and David Wilkins, in their book Tribes, Treaties, and Constitutional Tribulations, write:
“Most litigation dealing with Indian matters revolves around this clause, and from it springs the massive edifice of legislation, court decisions, and administrative rules and regulations that compose the structure and substance of the federal relationship with Indians and Indian tribes.”
In their book Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise, Steven Light and Kathryn Rand report:
“Tribes, of course, were not represented at the Constitutional Convention, nor did they ratify the Constitution. Accordingly, they remained extraconstitutional sovereigns, separate from the U.S. system of government and free of the constraints of the Constitution.”
The Washington Administration
George Washington became the first President of the new United States in 1789. Robert Venables, in his chapter in American Indians/American Presidents: A History, writes:
“He was not prone to listen to Indians because he, like most whites of his era, believed that Euro-American culture was more advanced. Americans believed that Indians would assimilate into American culture, give up their citizenship in Indian nations, and join the American experiment after prolonged exposure to white civilization.”
Under the new U.S. Constitution, the American leadership—President George Washington, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, and Secretary of War Henry Knox—assumed that Indian policies were now vested in the federal government rather than in the state governments. Furthermore, they saw Indian affairs being directed by the executive branch. They viewed Indian policy as a branch of foreign policy and viewed Indian tribes as foreign nations. Administratively, the relationships between the newly formed United States and the various Indian nations should have been a foreign policy matter. However, from the very beginning Indian affairs were under the authority of the Secretary of War rather than the Secretary of State. Part of this was due to the personalities of George Washington’s administration: he was closer to Henry Knox, the Secretary of War, and wanted to have more control over this area. Congress therefore gave authority over Indian affairs to the War Department.
U.S. Secretary of War Henry Knox lobbied President George Washington to make the reform of American Indian policy a priority of his presidency. Consequently, the two men developed a new Indian policy for the United States. As foreign nations, Indian policy should be part of foreign policy under the Secretary of State, but since Knox had been doing the job and had the information about Indians at his fingertips, they decided it should be under the Department of War.
With regard to the ideals of the new Indian policy, historian Joseph Ellis, in his book American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies at the Founding of the Republic, reports:
“The terms of all treaties would be binding on both parties in perpetuity and both the power and the honor of the federal government would be pledged to their enforcement.”
In addition, all treaties were to contain a provision which would provide the Indians with agricultural implements so that they could make the transition from savagery (meaning hunting) to civilization (meaning farming).
George Washington wanted to use his influence to make sure that the fate of the Indian nations did not end badly. In his book Savages and Scoundrels: The Untold Story of America’s Road to Empire Through Indian Territory, Paul VanDevelder reports:
“During Washington’s first term of office he and his secretary of war, Henry Knox, expended more of their energies achieving this objective than on managing diplomatic affair with European allies.”
With regard to George Washington and Henry Knox, Paul VanDevelder reports:
“Both men agreed that the tribes should be regarded as foreign nations fully capable of keeping peace, making war, and managing their own governmental affairs. Accordingly, Indian treaties should be regarded as the supreme laws of the land, a status sanctioned by the authority and jurisdiction of the federal government that could in no way be abridged by the petty jealousies of states.”
Secretary of War Henry Knox, recognizing that war with the Indians would be prohibitively expensive, and that war without prior negotiation would be unjust, began a policy of negotiation. This reversed the “conquest theory” (that the United States had title to Indian land because of its victory over England) and recognized Indian rights to the land. He felt that it was important for Indians to be introduced to the idea of a love for exclusive property and suggested the appointment of Christian missionaries to live among the Indians as one way of introducing this idea.
The first treaty negotiations with an Indian nation were to be with the Creeks. Under the new Constitution, treaties—agreements between two or more sovereign nations—require the “advice and consent” of the Senate. George Washington interpreted this to mean that he must appear before the Senate in person prior to the treaty negotiations. According to historian Joseph Ellis:
“The result was part fiasco, part comedy.”
Never again would a president appear in person to seek advice and consent from the Senate on a treaty: hereafter, the treaty would be sent to the Senate for their approval after it had been negotiated.
(For more about this process see: Indians 101: A short overview of Indian treaties)
History writer Ted Morgan, in his book Wilderness at Dawn: The Settling of the North American Continent, writes of Indian policy under President George Washington:
“No one suggested that Indians should become American citizens; the two societies were considered incompatible. One was pagan, preliterate, and nomadic. The other was Christian, literate, and agricultural.”
It would be nice to say that the Washington administration established coherent guidelines which would be further developed by the presidential administrations which followed. However, this was not the case. In the more than two centuries following the Washington administration, Indian policies have varied widely, some adhering to the Constitution while others preferred to ignore it.
Indians 101
Twice each week—on Tuesdays and Thursdays—this series presents American Indian topics. More American Indian histories from this series:
Indians 101: Thomas Jefferson & the American Indians
Indians 101: President Benjamin Harrison and Indian Policy
Indians 101: President Andrew Johnson and the Indians
Indians 101: President James Monroe and the Indians
Indians 101: President James Polk and the Indians
Indians 101: President Hayes and the Indians
Indians 101: President Taft and the Indians
Indians 101: President Reagan and the Indians
Indians 101: President Truman and the Indians