CHAPTER XXXVII. THE COMMUNISTIC LIFE. INDIAN MEN AND WOMEN OF

PROMINENCE. MORALITY

There was much of the old Indian life, beyond the Mississippi, in the years preceding 1880, that was picturesque if not beautiful. Contrary to popular belief, the Indians were not continually at war. Certain organizations of young men among some bands did make warfare their chief aim of life until reaching middle age. But the average Indian at home was just as different from the Indian on the warpath, as are our troops in action, the opposite of the same men as citizens. Entirely too much emphasis has been placed upon the Indian as a warrior.

The communistic life was in vogue in many places west of the Mississippi between 1850 and 1878. The communistic sentiment, evinced in nearly every village and clan-group, was so different from our life today, that I find myself compelled to illustrate it through the following incident.

The old blind medicine man of the Otter-tail Pillagers, Bay-bah-dwun-gay-aush, was found by me helpless, living in a wretched shack on the edge of a swamp at Pine Point, Minnesota. He had been swindled out of his property. Commissioner Valentine, on my recommendation, kindly issued orders that old Bay-bah-dwun-gay-aush and his friend, the aged May-cud-day-wub, be rationed every Wednesday as long as they lived. Out of gratitude, the old man gave me the original birch-bark roll of the Mid-di-we-win, or Grand Medicine Society. He was the roll-keeper. In 1909, when received, the roll was 102 years old. It contains five degrees, which have been translated, but the old shaman requested that publication be deferred until his death. I desire to present in abridged form the fourth, or the Beaver degree, illustrating that phase of Indian character to which I have referred. In a general way, the sentiment is expressed as follows:—

The beavers live together in harmony. They occupy one village. They do not take advantage of each other as do white people. They share everything in common. They strike the water at night, and thus signal to each other when danger is near. Their storehouses of food are open to all. They help each other, build the dams together, care for the young and support the old. Thus we Ojibwa should live as do the beavers and as did our grandfathers, who learned this from the beaver clan.

The contrast between this beautiful sentiment and that obtaining in most Indian communities today is very marked. With the passing away of the communistic life, and the adoption of the more selfish point of view of the white man, Indian character was not greatly improved.

The begging dance, quite common two or three generations ago, survives here and there in spite of efforts of the Government and the missionaries to extinguish it. This same begging, or gift dance, has been persistently misunderstood. Originally, a Sioux, Pawnee, Cheyenne, or other Indian, who assembled his friends together and distributed in addition to food, even his blankets and ponies, became a famous man. He had done a good thing. His act was prompted by generosity, and a love of his fellowman. The Agent and missionary, however, told him that one should not give gifts, but on the contrary he must accumulate and hoard. All of this was very confusing to the Indians of the transition period. The older Indians (_page 324_) cannot refuse their friends food, and such as still continue in the faith of their fathers feed those less fortunate than themselves, although by so doing they deprive themselves of food.

The absolute change from these communistic ideas, from the general brotherhood of the red man, to the more practical (if not sordid) views of the white man, had a curious effect on many of the Indians. The sharper Indians soon observed that among the white people there were rich and poor. The missionary, unselfishly laboring to uplift the aborigines, was very poor in this world’s goods. Yet he was self-sustaining and endeavored to persuade the Indians to become so. Both the Government teacher and the missionary impressed upon the aborigine ideas of thrift. Soon after allotments were issued, and the Indians received same, appeared other white men—bankers, real estate men and merchants. All of these secured Indian land or timber, and thus became well-to-do or rich. A certain class of half-educated Indians shrewdly observing that although the missionary pleaded, and the Agent and lawyer of the Great Father talked and blustered much, one hard, cold fact stood out indisputably: the missionary waxed poor, the Indian poorer, but the man in the frontier town waxed rich. It was incomprehensible to the old Indian, who clung to communistic ideals, but perfectly clear to the educated Indian. The latter realized that certain white men did not practice what the good missionary preached. To such, the word _theft_ sounded very much the same as _thrift_. So the Indian—in many cases—drifted into evil ways, and like the white man of the frontier town, he scorned the old communistic life of his father, and to his ear there appeared practically no difference between the two words I have mentioned: thrift and theft.

INDIAN MEN AND WOMEN

Of those representing the olden days, there were a large number who achieved more or less prominence. I am very sorry that space forbids a consideration of their careers in this book. I present a partial list of their names, and if readers will consult the _Handbook of American Indians_, short biographical sketches of most of these will be found. The negro has produced far fewer great men than the Indian, yet the negro has always vastly outnumbered the former. During forty years there has been practically no discrimination against the black man save in the South. His educational advantages in the North have been many, and his opportunities multitudinous. Slavery retarded him in a sense, yet slavery taught him enforced industry—which the Indian has never had. We would therefore, expect a larger proportion of prominent negro men and women.

Omitting those previously mentioned in this book, we have: American Horse, Oglala Sioux; Big Mouth, Brulé Sioux; Black Beaver, Delaware; Black Kettle, Cheyenne; Bloody Knife, Arikara; Chas. Curtis, Kaw; Chas. D. Carter, Chickasaw; George Copway, Chippewa; Francisco, Yuma; Gall, Sioux; John Grass, Sioux; Hollow-horn Bear, Brulé Sioux; Peter Jones, Missisauga; Kanakuk, Kickapoo; Kamaiakan, Yakima; Keokuk, Sauk; Kicking Bird, Kiowa; Kintpuash (Capt. Jack), Modoc; Leschi, Nisqualli; Little Crow, Sioux; Little Raven, Arapaho; Little Thunder, Brulé Sioux; Little Wound, Sioux; Lone Wolf, Kiowa; Mahtoiowa (Whirling Bear), Brulé Sioux; Many Horses, Piegan; Joel B. Mayes, Cherokee; Nagonub, Chippewa; Nakaidoklini, Apache; Namequa, Sauk; Nana, Apache; Napeshneeduta, Sioux; Nawah, Apache; Albert Negahnquet, Potawatomie; Ojibwa, Ojibwa; Oronhyatekha, Mohawk; John Otherday, Sioux; Ouray, Ute; Eli Samuel Parker, Seneca; Quana Parker, Comanche; Peter Perkins Pitchlynn, Choctaw; Pizhiki (Buffalo), Chippewa; Simon Pokagon, Potawatomi; Pleasant Porter, Creek; Alexander Lawrence Posey, Creek; John W. Quinney, Stockbridge; Rain-in-the-Face, Sioux; Red Horn, Piegan; Red Iron Band, Sioux; Gabriel Renville, Sioux; Roman Nose, Cheyenne; John Ross, Cherokee; Sassaba, Chippewa; Satanta, Kiowa; Scarface Charlie, Modoc; Schonchin, Modoc; John Sunday, Chippewa; Souligny, Menominee; Standing Bear, Ponca; Tamaha, Sioux; Tendoy, Bannock; Solimon Two-stars, Sioux; Wabanaquot (White Cloud), Chippewa; James D. Wafford, Cherokee; Wamditanka (Great War Eagle), Sioux; Wapasha, Sioux; Washakie, Shoshoni; Eleazar Williams, Iroquois; Winema (Woman Chief), Modoc; Wopohwats, Cheyenne; Allen Wright, Choctaw; Yellow Thunder, Winnebago.

Doctor Charles A. Eastman—than whom there is no more competent judge of the Plains Indians of 1850–1890—has informed me that next to Red Cloud and Sitting Bull, he considers Spotted Tail and Crazy Horse (Sioux) two of the greatest Indians of modern times.

In addition to the Indians, both educated and not, whose names have been presented in this Indian History, there occur two who were particularly prominent in helping their own people.

Bright Eyes (Susette La Flesche) was born in Nebraska about 1850. She was educated at a mission school on the Omaha reservation, and later at a private school in Elizabeth, N. J. In 1877–78 the Ponca were forcibly removed to Indian Territory from their home on Niobrara reservation, South Dakota. In order to bring Indian removals before the public, Standing Bear, accompanied by Susette La Flesche and her brother, visited the principal cities of the United States, where her appeals for humanity toward her race aroused the interest of thousands. As a result, a request was urged on the Government that there be no more removals of tribes, and this request has been respected, when practicable. She was very active with her pen until her death in 1902. She was considered one of the brightest Indian women of modern times.

Sarah Winnemucca, a Paiute, was born in Nevada in 1844. She became interpreter to Government officials, and served General O. O. Howard as scout in the Bannock War of 1877, when no Indian man would penetrate the country occupied by the hostiles. She lectured in the East in the eighties, and wrote a book on the Paiute’s wrongs. She died in 1891, after a remarkable career.

A score of others might be included as worthy of a place in an Indian biography.

Mr. Leupp in his book stated that people were continually asking him this question: “Will the Indians produce a Booker T. Washington?”

It is quite possible for the Indians to produce a national character. There is a splendid work to be done by such a person. For more than a century we have labored in educating Indians, yet we have not produced a single great man or woman. Do not misunderstand me. I mean a truly great Indian, one of the stamp of Tecumseh, Chief Joseph, Red Cloud, Sacagawea, or Sequoya. The latter was trained and educated fifty years before we devoted any attention to Indian progress, and his alphabet, his attainments, and his reputation are due to his own efforts rather than to us. What woman have we of the fame of Sacagawea, the poor Shoshoni, who guided Lewis and Clark to the Pacific ocean? Not one. Excepting Clara Barton, the noble Civil War nurse, and a few other American women, we have no person, even among white women, who underwent such dangers and privations, or stood forth more clearly as a brave and heroic character than this same Sacagawea. We have produced a great many noble Indians, men and women, prominent, but not to be considered truly great.

One may not misrepresent, if one claims that the Indian great men and women are of the past. There will not arise a Booker Washington, unless some strong, able Indian champions the cause of his people in the large sense. There are a number of young, bright Indians, chief among whom is Mr. Henry Roe-Cloud, and one or two others. But most of the educated Indians are concerned with other than Indian matters. None of them may be said to have entered the public arena as a dominant figure. If an educated Indian should give up his entire time to working for his people, as Doctor Grenfell works for the fishermen of Labrador, he would become famous. It has always been a surprise to me that the educated Indians have not seen this opportunity and availed themselves of it. Hundreds of the educated Indians are teachers, ministers, or Government employees. All of them are, as everybody knows, upright and able. But there is a vast difference between a position held by these excellent gentlemen, and a position that might be held by one of their own in standing as a true sponsor for the Red Race in America, and in an intelligent and forceful manner presenting the needs and aims of his race. Such a man should present an uncompromising front against graft and incompetency. A mediocre man could not attain to this position, but given the opportunity, there is no reason under the sun why some educated Indian should not go down into history as a truly great man.

It is quite incomprehensible that so many of our educated Indians are timid. All of them realize the dreadful situation of many of their brothers in the West. A few have referred, in a more or less guarded fashion, to the wrongs of Indians. Dr. Eastman is especially frank upon this subject—as is Dr. Montezuma. Admitting so much, it remains to be said that not one has come before the American public as a stern, able, uncompromising fighter for the rights of his race.

The Indians need a national character. The moment that an Indian of exceptional ability, presence and strength appears on the platform, and through the press, becomes the champion of his race, the American people will rally to his support. But if such an Indian is chiefly concerned in furthering the interests of some society, or missionary organization, or of a single tribe of Indians; and if he presents mere denunciations and does not suggest proper remedies, he will achieve no great success.

The Society of American Indians is doing a good work, but in my humble opinion, it might accomplish far greater results if in addition to its advocacy of new laws, the division of Indian money, etc., its powerful organization began a fight through the medium of some selected champion, for the full protection of Indian rights and an effective, and not a paper citizenship.

INDIAN MORALITY

On page 380, Mrs. Elsie E. Newton stated that morality was a relative term, or depended on one’s point of view. This is entirely true. The oldtime Indians were not immoral, although some of them were unmoral. Immorality came with the white man. There was an abundance of cruelty among Indians, and I have alluded to it elsewhere. Many Indians would not do things which we consider proper, or at least do not forbid in our moral code. As against this, some Indian customs are considered by us to be immoral. Drinking, while practiced in Mexico and among Apaches, and in some Southwest tribes, was practically unknown throughout the rest of the United States prior to the landing of our respected ancestors on the shores of Virginia, New York, and Massachusetts. The black drink of the Creeks was ceremonial, and not indulged in as an intoxicant. I have referred elsewhere to plural marriages. These do not seem to have been considered by the Indians any more immoral than they were by the patriarchs of the Old Testament. Indians usually supported their wives, even after separation. The modern method of easy divorce, followed by the usual suit for alimony, is reserved to polite white society. I once heard a worthy gentleman lamenting plural marriages among the Navaho. An educated Indian happened to be present, and he mentioned the names of two prominent white persons (to be found in _Who’s Who in America_). Both occupy high positions, and one has had six wives and the other five husbands. The educated Indian ventured to remark to the worthy “uplifter” that a careful search of the Navaho reservation would fail to produce (even among the so-called pagans) two polygamists equal to these representatives of the white man’s civilization!

I have never seen a really immoral dance among Indians. I have heard many addresses at various public gatherings in which the immorality of the Indians during these dances was denounced. Although witnessing thirty or forty dances on different reservations, all the performers I observed were properly dressed. Even in the Sioux Omaha dance, the men wore quite as much as do college students during a track meet. In the squaw dance, in which both sexes take part, the partners do not even hold each other. Yet, a minister once denounced me for taking part in so innocent a pastime. The very next evening the white employees on that reservation gave a dance, all of us attended, and I had the pleasure of dancing with the reverend gentleman’s daughter. He saw nothing wrong in the waltz or two-step in which partners hold each other—and there is no harm in such dances. Yet he objected to the squaw dance in which the participants scarcely look at their partners. I mention this merely to indicate how inconsistent many people are with reference to Indian dances. I am informed that some of the educated Indians now take part in the maxixe and the fox-trot. If the reverend gentleman, to whom I have referred, was scandalized in observing a squaw-dance, what must be his feelings when he observes educated young men and women lapsing into the paganism of Paris and New York!

The Government’s taboo of the begging dance, and the curtailment of the ordinary Indian dances, leave no amusements in which the older Indians may participate. Consequently, they are quite likely to gamble and engage in far more harmful pastimes. Ordinary dances should be permitted, and the gift dance regulated.