| OCR Text |
Show 9. The methods of military managment are utterly ir~econcila6lew ith the relation Gf guardian and ward. The self assumed guardianship of our government over these unlet-tered children of the wilderness, carries with it all the obligations that prow out of that relation. These can neither be shaken off nor disre- D gxrded witllout national criliic? ns well as disgrace. C:uardi:in&hip is nlost ?acrrtl nod ir~sl~onsilt~rtlres t, aud ns n uation we lnust aliswrr to tbr God of 11ationa for its faithti11 .ulrninit~t~~atio~~. The paramount duty growing out of the trust is to teach, to enlighten, to civilize our wards. If teaching means the instruction given to the Aztecs by Cortez and Pizarro; if enIightening signifies the conflap-tion of Indian villages; if civilization means peace, and peace meaus massacre a la Sand creek. then bv dl means let us have the transfer. To t.\.rry unpr>j~idiced mind the mtrr welltion ot' the militnv iu conuee. tion with tlie rt:lution of gl~a rdina~u~d ward disvloses the abs~urliryo f the association. 10. The transfer will in my opinion entail upon the Ereaszvry a large iwease of mnwa qenditzlre. It is clearly demonstrable that the war policy in co ducting our Indian affairs is infinitely more expensive than the peacfpolicy ;, and if the transfer is made, as a matter of course the former &ll prevail. IF so, it seems to me, our legislators would do well to investigate the qnestiou of comparative cost. It will not surprise me if an examination will show that in the last 40 years the war policy and management of Indian aftairs have cost the nation little if any less than $500,000,000, and also that the civil ma~iagement or peace policy has cost less than 9960,000,000 including annuities, presents, payments for immense bodies of land, and everything else. If it be obiected that the war manaeement does not necessarilv involve war, I answer that Indian managem&t by the military does inGolve the expense of a large standing army in the Indian country, and will cost the country all war costs except the destruction of property, and that the army can be far better dispensed with than not, under proper civil man-agement, and its cost saved to the treasury. But whether war be a neees-sary result or not, it always happens that it does result and brings with it all its train of horrors and penalties. If it be alleged that many of our wars have oco~irredu nder the civil administration, and are therefore chargeable to it, I answer that while the fact is admitted the conclusion is false, for it has already been abundantly shown that nearly all our Indian wars since the bureau has been in civil hands had their origin in the rashness or imprudence of our military. If ecopoiny is desirable in our present financial situation, the proposed transfer will, in my judgment, be disastrons. 11. The presence in peaceful tzmes of a large military establishment in a republic always endangers the supremacy of civil authority and the lZberte'es of thepeople. History is so replete with striking illustrations of the truth of this proposition that arggument to sustain it would be simply attempting to provean axiom. I therefore close the argument by merely anno~mcingit . This brings me to the question, whether the bureau ought not to be erected into an independent department? In whatever management Indian affairs are placed, there should be division of neither duties, powers nor respoilsibilities, but these shodd all, by all means, he concentrated in the same hands. But I have alrea& shown that the War Depa~tment should not be intrusted with these affairs, and I am of the ol~iniont hat the Iuterior |
