Indian Rancherie on Dry Creek [Miwok] (12 pages)

REPORT . “Indian Rancherie on Ory Creek": An Early 1850s Indian Village on the Sacramento and San Joaquin County Line . Farris following the loss of horses and mules to Indians in the neighborhood. The final line in this article is noteworthy: These Indians think the Government of the United States has not acted ir good faith with them, in not carrying out the stipulations of the treaty, and they complain that the Ame-icans have cut off their supply of fish, destroyed their acorn trees, and have killed or driven away the deer from their hunting grounds, and that they are in a state dordering on actual starvation [SU, 5 February 1853:2]. The allusion to the treaty is almost certainly to one of the unratified treaties with a number of tribes throughout California that was entered into by government “treaty commissioners” in 1851 (Kappler 1904-1941, vol. 4; Watson 1994). The treaties promised the Indians designated lands, as well as a variety of supplies and livestock to sustain themselves on their reservations. Unfortunately, the Indians, acting in good faith, did not understand the procedures involved in treaty-making, especially the idea that Congress could deny the treaties (Hurtado 2002:105), or the fact that all the concessions would end up being on their part. One particular treaty was entered into at the forks of the Cosumnes River with four tribes in the area (Watson 1994:4748). One of these tribes has been identified as a Plains Miwok group called the Locolumne, which Phillips (1997:20) places in the area between Dry Creek and the Mokelumne River. Its leader at the time was a “notorious stock raider and antagonist of the Americans” named Polo (or Pollo) (Phillips 1997:108). However, he was killed before the treaty was signed on September 18, 1851. The assertive nature of the Indians of the Rancheria at Dry Creek would have been consistent with that of a group like the Locolumne under the leadership of someone like Polo (or Pollo; see Hurtado 2006:197). A fascinating editorial appeared in the San Joaquin Republican in mid-January 1853. Entitled “Our Indian Population,” it sounded a remarkably sympathetic note on the plight of the Indians: All the difficulties in which our people have been involved in the Indian region have either been the result of our own imprudences or have been brought about by the absurd acts of those persons whom the government styled “Indian Commissioners.” The Indian, in his native condition, has qualities of head and heart which, when he receives proper treatment, make him the friend of the white. Ask the border men, the hunter, the old pioneers; they will all say that while the Indian is a bitter enemy, he can be a faithful friend. It is true that he has many vices, and that he commits horrible cruelties when at war; but these vices arise more from a want of education than from an innate badness of disposition. It cannot be expected that the aborigines should be acquainted with the blandishments of polished life or the courtesies and proprieties which exists even in war amongst Christian nations. His notions are rude and it is only surprising that ignorance has not made these men more dangerous than they really are. It is estimated that there are some 100,000 Indians in California; men who will live, if they have to steal and massacre in order to obtain their bread. Now, it is manifest that, for the sake of the common peace, some disposition should be made of them, and it is fortunate that they are accommodating in their disposition and willing to place themselves under the protection of the whites—that they acknowledge our superiority and are disposed to give place. We have warred with the tribes, but with the most disastrous results, so that policy, and the ordinary dictates of humanity compels us to recommend the continuances of a pacific treatment. But while we would recommend this pacific policy we do not mean such as was adopted by the garrulous Reddick McKee and his associates. There was no reason in what they did. They transcended their powers and left matters in a worse state than they found them. They treated with the Indians and then discovered that they could not fulfill the conditions of their own treaties. The enormous Indian reservations which comprehended some of the fairest lands in the State, the enormous speculations given[?] have a shameful notoriety, and the utter incapacity of the late Commissioners themselves have disgusted our people and involved the Indian question in difficulties which did not before belong to it. We want no more tinkering with the Indian question. Let some definite policy be adopted by the incoming administration, and be firmly carried into effect. The [unclear in newpaper copy] has been proposed which is at all adequate to meet the question effectually is that which has just been proposed by Lieut. Beale, the Indian agent for this State, and which has just been transmitted to Washington. Perhaps no man in the Union is better qualified than he by experience and education for the task of conciliating the Indians, and therefore any recommendation proceeding from him must have great weight. He proposes to annul all the arrangements made by his predecessors, especially those establishing the enormous Indian reservations. In their stead, he says, it would be well to make other reservations, subject to suitable conditions, but much smaller in area, and he thinks that five would be amply sufficient for all the Indians in California. For instance, one might be located near the junction of the Gila with the Colorado, one between the San Joaquin and the 67

REPORT . “Indian Rancherie on Ory Creek": An Early 1850s Indian Village on the Sacramento and San Joaquin County Line . Farris following the loss of horses and mules to Indians in the neighborhood. The final line in this article is noteworthy: These Indians think the Government of the United States has not acted ir good faith with them, in not carrying out the stipulations of the treaty, and they complain that the Ame-icans have cut off their supply of fish, destroyed their acorn trees, and have killed or driven away the deer from their hunting grounds, and that they are in a state dordering on actual starvation [SU, 5 February 1853:2]. The allusion to the treaty is almost certainly to one of the unratified treaties with a number of tribes throughout California that was entered into by government “treaty commissioners” in 1851 (Kappler 1904-1941, vol. 4; Watson 1994). The treaties promised the Indians designated lands, as well as a variety of supplies and livestock to sustain themselves on their reservations. Unfortunately, the Indians, acting in good faith, did not understand the procedures involved in treaty-making, especially the idea that Congress could deny the treaties (Hurtado 2002:105), or the fact that all the concessions would end up being on their part. One particular treaty was entered into at the forks of the Cosumnes River with four tribes in the area (Watson 1994:4748). One of these tribes has been identified as a Plains Miwok group called the Locolumne, which Phillips (1997:20) places in the area between Dry Creek and the Mokelumne River. Its leader at the time was a “notorious stock raider and antagonist of the Americans” named Polo (or Pollo) (Phillips 1997:108). However, he was killed before the treaty was signed on September 18, 1851. The assertive nature of the Indians of the Rancheria at Dry Creek would have been consistent with that of a group like the Locolumne under the leadership of someone like Polo (or Pollo; see Hurtado 2006:197). A fascinating editorial appeared in the San Joaquin Republican in mid-January 1853. Entitled “Our Indian Population,” it sounded a remarkably sympathetic note on the plight of the Indians: All the difficulties in which our people have been involved in the Indian region have either been the result of our own imprudences or have been brought about by the absurd acts of those persons whom the government styled “Indian Commissioners.” The Indian, in his native condition, has qualities of head and heart which, when he receives proper treatment, make him the friend of the white. Ask the border men, the hunter, the old pioneers; they will all say that while the Indian is a bitter enemy, he can be a faithful friend. It is true that he has many vices, and that he commits horrible cruelties when at war; but these vices arise more from a want of education than from an innate badness of disposition. It cannot be expected that the aborigines should be

acquainted with the blandishments of polished life or the courtesies and proprieties which exists even in war amongst Christian nations. His notions are rude and it is only surprising that ignorance has not made these men more dangerous than they really are. It is estimated that there are some 100,000 Indians in California; men who will live, if they have to steal and massacre in order to obtain their bread. Now, it is manifest that, for the sake of the common peace, some disposition should be made of them, and it is fortunate that they are accommodating in their disposition and willing to place themselves under the protection of the whites—that they acknowledge our superiority and are disposed to give place. We have warred with the tribes, but with the most disastrous results, so that policy, and the ordinary dictates of humanity compels us to recommend the continuances of a pacific treatment. But while we would recommend this pacific policy we do not mean such as was adopted by the garrulous Reddick McKee and his associates. There was no reason in what they did. They transcended their powers and left matters in a worse state than they found them. They treated with the Indians and then discovered that they could not fulfill the conditions of their own treaties. The enormous Indian reservations which comprehended some of the fairest lands in the State, the enormous speculations given[?] have a shameful notoriety, and the utter incapacity of the late Commissioners themselves have disgusted our people and involved the Indian question in difficulties which did not before belong to it. We want no more tinkering with the Indian question. Let some definite policy be adopted by the incoming administration, and be firmly carried into effect. The [unclear in newpaper copy] has been proposed which is at all adequate to meet the question effectually is that which has just been proposed by Lieut. Beale, the Indian agent for this State, and which has just been transmitted to Washington. Perhaps no man in the Union is better qualified than he by experience and education for the task of conciliating the Indians, and therefore any recommendation proceeding from him must have great weight. He proposes to annul all the arrangements made by his predecessors, especially those establishing the enormous Indian reservations. In their stead, he says, it would be well to make other reservations, subject to suitable conditions, but much smaller in area, and he thinks that five would be amply sufficient for all the Indians in California. For instance, one might be located near the junction of the Gila with the Colorado, one between the San Joaquin and the 67