Collection: Directories and Documents > Tanis Thorne Native Californian & Nisenan Collection

About This Item:

Title: Malfeasance or Indirection [California Indian Superintendency] Collection Type: Directories and Documents Collection Name: Tanis Thorne Native Californian & Nisenan Collection # of Pages: 12 Download PDF: User Login Required Download OCR Text: User Login Required

Date Scanned: 2024-09-03 22:12:09 OCR Software Version #: tesseract 5.4.1 Item Sourced From: PDF First Created: 2025-03-17 03:22:44 Last Updated: 2025-03-17 03:22:44

Original Held At: Searls Historical Library Location: 161 Nevada City Hwy, Nevada City, CA 95959

Page: of 12  

The Historical Society of Southern California g' ? l lar e comp ex, difficult and delice alte c g i y Ty ate ff ars th if ou ht to em lo eve function of a fir st class depar tment. But Congress failed to implement his recommendation. This concomitant failure to modify the administrative structure particularly in the post Civil War years, made it difficult for re7 sponsible individuals to respond in times of crisis Another difficulty was the lack of leadership. Not only were ~ most California superintendents unacquainted with Indan af fairs, but a party’s defeat at the polls usually meant a change in superintendents. These facts combined with the dismissal of ae 4 superintendents for suspected fiscal misconduct made for a highl 7 unstable bureaucracy. Given the lack of trained men and aie tenure, there was in some instances no real superintendent. In the course of sixteen years (1852-1866), ten men were a minted superintendent or supervising agent. The 1860-1864, Baal when the state was divided into a northern and southern disicict was particularly unstable. During that time, three northern and thre southern supervising agents were appointed.” Henley’s five a ap se longest; A. D. Rightmire’s four months the shortest. crucial impact of this whole system was a lack of continuity. especially in view of superintendents’ haphazard record kee se and the practice of removing official papers upon leavin cftice The na tural consequence was both a misdirection and es eee 0 policy as well as misapplication and misappropriation of public eee Here was a seemingly impossible situation. Removal of ureau offices from politics and longer tenure probably would not have solved the problem. Perhaps it was human nature, observed Treasury Official Hugh McCulloch, that “Men who iver the reputation of dealing fairly with white men did not hesitate to pracES are most shameful impositions in dealing with Indians.” — ; — was later accused of ‘shameful dealings” in The absence of trained conscientious personnel and a poorl staffed bureau office was aggravated by California’s ventana Since from four to twelve months was required to exchan : letters, the bureau had no option but to place greater reliane than usual on the superintendent. ‘Owing to the remoteness of California and the length of time necessarily employed in trans[ 288 J California Indian Business Affairs mitted communications to and from the same,” wrote Dole in 1861, “the department is compelled in great measure to rely upon the sagacity and integrity of supervising agents located there. ...'° The impact of this factor cannot be overemphasized. Take, for example, the case of a drought. In August the superintendent may have advised Washington that by December the Indians would either starve or leave the reserves in search of food. Requesting additional money for subsistence and instructions, the superintendent probably did not receive instructions until well into the crisis period. Perhaps it was little wonder officers turned to credit. Reviewing the course of the California superintendency’s fiscal ~ affairs, indecision, indirection and irregularities were constant themes. The immediate cause was obvious—bureau administrative structure and remoteness. The solution, in the minds of informed persons, appeared relatively simple—on the spot supervision by an officer with authority second only to the commissioner. This was clearly Lea’s purpose in 1851 when he suggested the creation of an assistant commissioner of Indian affairs for California. But Congress failed to act.” In 1859 Commissioner J. W. Denver and Secretary of the Interior Jacob Thompson, suggesting another solution, recommended the abolishment of the superintendency and division of the state into two administrative districts. Operating both from a sense of urgency and frustration, they realized the ‘‘colonization” system had failed to “civilize” the Indians and the bureau had lost fiscal control over its California officers. As Thompson put it, “With an anxious desire to devise some plan of operations which promises to secure the welfare of the Indians on the one hand, and relieve the treasury from the support of a helpless and dependent population on the other, I recommend as the most practicable policy the abolition of the superintendency, agencies, and sub-agencies, and the division of the State into two distinct Indian districts.” Congress approved the plan but as early as 1862 Secretary of the Interior Caleb B. Smith recommended reestablishment of the California superintendency.” Another remedy was proposed in 1860 by the California legis\ lature. “Federal Authorities... ,” read the legislature’s petition, should “cede to the State of California the entire jurisdiction over [ 289 J