Peace Policy (1870)

Peace Policy (1870)
Name	Peace Policy (1870)
Date	1870
Location	United States
Outcome	Bureau of Indian Affairs administrative changes; mission board involvement

Peace Policy (1870) was an administrative initiative of the United States inaugurated under President Ulysses S. Grant that aimed to reform federal relations with Native American tribes on the Great Plains and in the American West. The program sought to replace military oversight with civilian and religious supervision, to reduce Indian Wars violence, and to implement a system of reservation management involving Christian mission agencies and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The policy intersected with contemporary events including the Transcontinental Railroad, the Indian Appropriations Act, and westward expansion driven by the Homestead Act.

Background and Origins

The policy emerged amid post‑Civil War reconstruction of federal institutions after the American Civil War and during conflicts such as the Red Cloud's War and Sioux Wars. Influences included speeches and advocacy from religious leaders tied to the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Methodist Episcopal Church, and the Catholic Church in the United States, alongside reformers associated with the National Indian Association, the Indian Rights Association, and members of Congress like Carl Schurz and Oliver P. Morton. The policy responded to incidents including the Hays Massacre era tensions, the aftermath of the Sand Creek Massacre, and clashes tied to the Bozeman Trail. Congressional legislation such as the Indian Appropriations Act and administrative structures like the Department of the Interior (United States) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs shaped the administrative environment that produced the policy.

Policy Goals and Implementation

The stated goals combined pacification, assimilation, and administrative reform: to reduce dependence on the United States Army, to decrease corruption in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and to promote conversion and acculturation through denominational schools and mission farms. Implementation relied on appointing religiously affiliated agents from organizations such as the Quakers, Presbyterian Church (USA), Methodist Episcopal Church, Baptist Church (United States), and Roman Catholic Church to serve as reservation agents, and on expanding boarding schools modeled on institutions like the Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Federal departments coordinated through the Interior Department (United States) and officials including the Secretary of the Interior to oversee treaties like the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868), allotment efforts, and distribution of annuities. The policy intersected with railroad interests such as the Union Pacific Railroad and agricultural promotion efforts influenced by the Morrill Land-Grant Acts.

Key Figures and Agencies

Key federal figures included President Ulysses S. Grant, Secretary of the Interior Jacob D. Cox, and Ely S. Parker of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, while congressional supporters encompassed reformers in the Senate of the United States and the House of Representatives. Religious intermediaries featured leaders from the Religious Society of Friends, missionaries associated with the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, and clerics from the Trinity Church and other denominational bodies. Military counterparts included officers from the United States Army such as General Philip Sheridan who engaged in contemporaneous campaigns, and regional commanders at posts like Fort Laramie (Wyoming) and Fort Sill. Administrative agencies involved the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the War Department in its residual roles, and philanthropic organizations such as the Peabody Fund.

Impact on Native American Communities

The policy produced mixed effects for tribes including the Lakota Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Nez Perce, Sioux Nation, Ute, Kiowa, and Comanche. Some communities experienced reduced direct military encounters near agencies and mission centers; others faced increased pressure to cede territory through treaty negotiations and annuity systems rooted in the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868) framework. Mission schools and boarding institutions influenced cultural change among youth, similar to impacts noted later at Haskell Indian Nations University precursors and Indian boarding school networks. Economic shifts accompanied loss of pastoral lands used for bison hunting, accelerated by factors such as the Near Extinction of the American Bison and expansion of ranching and settlement tied to the Homestead Act.

Controversies and Criticism

Critics included tribal leaders like Sitting Bull and Chief Joseph who contested imposition of agency control and loss of sovereignty, and reformers such as Helen Hunt Jackson who later criticized federal Indian policy in works like A Century of Dishonor. Accusations focused on political patronage, denominational favoritism, and ongoing corruption in annuity distribution despite reform aims, with scandals implicating agents and contractors associated with railroads and supply firms. Debates played out in venues including the United States Congress and the press organs such as the New York Herald and reform journals. Military leaders who favored direct action, advocates of allotment like Dawes Act proponents, and settlers pressing for land further complicated consensus.

Legacy and Historical Assessment

Historians assess the policy as an early federal experiment in civilianized Indian administration that foreshadowed later measures like the Dawes Act of 1887 and the growth of the Indian boarding school system exemplified by Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Scholarship links the policy to broader processes including assimilationism, denominational influence in federal policy, and the legal erosion of tribal sovereignty through a sequence of treaties, statutes, and administrative practice noted in works analyzing the Fort Laramie Treaties, Plains Indian Wars, and the evolution of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Debates continue in studies by historians of the American West and indigenous scholars focusing on resilience and resistance among communities such as the Navajo Nation, Choctaw, and Cherokee Nation, and in legal reviews of federal Indian law and tribal rights. The policy remains a reference point in discussions of church‑state interaction, reformist rhetoric of the Gilded Age, and the long arc of United States–Native American relations.

Category:1870 in the United States Category:United States Indian policy Category:Native American history