Reviewed by:

• Charles C. Painter: The Life of an Indian Reform Advocate by Valerie Sherer Mathes
• Thomas J. Lappas

Known for her work on the Women's National Indian Association (WNIA) and Helen Hunt Jackson, Valerie Sherer Mathes has composed a well-organized narrative about Charles C. Painter, investigator and lobbyist for the Indian Rights Association (IRA). Painter offers a window into how laws targeting Native Americans were written, passed, and implemented. Each chapter covers about one year of his work and is subdivided according to specific investigative or legislative efforts, while chronicling his travel between Washington, D.C., the Lake Mohonk Conference of the Friends of the Indian, his home in Massachusetts, and Native American communities in the American West. She builds upon William T. Hagan's institutional history, The Indian Rights Association: The Herbert Welsh Years, 1882–1904 (University of Arizona Press, 1985) and employs Painter's letters from the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, American Missionary Association Archives at Tulane, Hampton University, and the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

Mathes dedicates chapter 1 to his life as a pastor and professor of theology but shifts quickly to the watershed years for Indian reform, 1884 to 1894. Chapter 2 covers the start of his Indian reform work, in which he attempted to alleviate the starvation of the Piegan Indians in Montana. His report brought attention and pressure for governmental relief, and he worked with the WNIA and IRA to influence Congress to increase appropriations. He studied incursions on the Crow Creek Reservation in South Dakota, which he successfully lobbied against. Painter, like most Indian reformers, was influenced by Jackson's A Century of Dishonor, and chapter 3 discusses how this influence, along with visits to the California Mission Indians, led to a longer-term commitment to securing their land base. Chapter 4 discusses the Dawes Act, which Mathes describes as "one of the most destructive pieces of Indian legislation in the nation's history" (84). [End Page 106] A thread through the book is Painter's developing conflict with the act's namesake, Senator Henry L. Dawes. An assimilationist and supporter of allotment as a policy, Painter was critical of elements of the law and how it was implemented, namely that the officials responsible for assigning plots were subject to political pressure and bribery. Painter advocated selecting Indian education commissioners from outside of the Indian Office, in opposition to Dawes. Chapter 5 covers Painter's securing of payments to Dakota scouts in 1891 and the opening of lands in Oklahoma Territory to Whites. Chapter 6 discusses his opposition to Ute Removal from southern Colorado to Utah and the ultimately failed attempt to secure a homeland for imprisoned Apaches. Chapter 7, "The California Mission Indian Commission, 1891," chronicles Painter's greatest accomplishment—securing reservation lands for several California tribes. Although the government established a commission of three, including Painter, Albert K. Smiley, and Joseph P. Moore, it was largely Painter who secured land for some of the California tribes who had previously lost both tribal and individually held lands. Chapter 8 traces Painter's work to stop frauds committed against Native Americans and his increasingly strained relationship with Dawes. Painter and the IRA sought educational funding, which Dawes opposed. Besides working on issues relating to the Oneidas and the Utes and problems with Stockbridge enrollments, he toured Indian Territory and learned about the frauds associated with allotments there. Chapter 9 explains that despite his attempts to find a homeland for Apache prisoners taken captive years earlier, they were moved to Fort Sill, where many died. He was working on several issues when he took ill late that year and ultimately died in January 1895.

Even the most well-intentioned federal laws or policies concerning Indian tribes during this era were assimilationist and sought to diminish tribal sovereignty. Mathes acknowledges that Painter was part of that trend. Yet in California he was instrumental in the reacquisition of land and fought against the corruption associated with allotment and leasing that put Native American land and...

审核人：

• 查尔斯·C·画家：瓦莱丽·谢勒·马西斯（Valerie Sherer Mathes）的印度改革倡导者的生活
• 托马斯·J·拉帕斯

Valerie Sherer Mathes 因其在全国印度妇女协会 (WNIA) 和海伦·亨特·杰克逊 (Helen Hunt Jackson) 的工作而闻名，她撰写了一篇关于 Charles C. Painter、印第安人权利协会 (IRA) 调查员和说客的组织良好的叙述。Painter 提供了一个窗口，可以了解针对美洲原住民的法律是如何制定、通过和实施的。每一章都涵盖了他大约一年的工作，并根据具体的调查或立法工作进行了细分，同时记录了他在华盛顿特区、印第安人之友莫洪克湖会议、他在马萨诸塞州的家和美国原住民社区之间的旅行。美国西部。她以威廉·T·哈根 (William T. Hagan) 的机构历史为基础，《印度权利协会：赫伯特·威尔士岁月，1882-1904 年》（亚利桑那大学出版社，1985 年）并使用宾夕法尼亚历史学会、杜兰美国传教士协会档案馆、汉普​​顿大学和华盛顿特区国家档案馆的画家信件

马蒂斯在第一章中讲述了他作为牧师和神学教授的生活，但很快转向了印度改革的分水岭，1884 年到 1894 年。第二章介绍了他在印度改革工作的开始，他试图缓解印度教的饥饿问题。蒙大拿州的皮根印第安人。他的报告引起了政府救济的关注和压力，他与 WNIA 和 IRA 合作，影响国会增加拨款。他研究了对南达科他州乌鸦溪保护区的入侵，并成功游说反对。画家，像大多数印度改革者一样，受到杰克逊的《百年耻辱》的影响，第 3 章讨论了这种影响以及对加利福尼亚传教士印第安人的访问如何导致他们对保护他们的土地基地做出长期承诺。第 4 章讨论了道威斯法案，马西斯将其描述为“印度历史上最具破坏性的立法之一”（84）。[结束第 106 页]贯穿全书的一条线索是画家与该法案的同名参议员亨利·道斯 (Henry L. Dawes) 之间不断发展的冲突。作为同化主义者和分配政策的支持者，Painter 对法律的要素及其实施方式持批评态度，即负责分配地块的官员受到政治压力和贿赂。潘特主张从印度办公室之外挑选印度教育专员，反对道斯。第 5 章介绍了 Painter 于 1891 年向达科他州童子军支付款项以及向白人开放俄克拉荷马领地的土地。第 6 章讨论了他反对从科罗拉多州南部到犹他州的 Ute Removal，以及为被监禁的阿帕奇人争取家园的最终失败。第 7 章，“加利福尼亚州印第安人委员会，1891 年”，记载了画家最伟大的成就——为几个加利福尼亚部落保护保留地。尽管政府设立了一个由三人组成的委员会，包括画家、阿尔伯特 K. Smiley 和约瑟夫 P.摩尔，但主要是画家为之前失去部落和个人拥有的土地的一些加利福尼亚部落获得了土地。第 8 章追溯了画家为阻止针对美洲原住民的欺诈行为以及他与道斯日益紧张的关系所做的工作。画家和爱尔兰共和军寻求教育资金，道斯反对。除了处理与 Oneidas 和 Utes 相关的问题以及斯托克布里奇入学问题之外，他还参观了印第安领地并了解了与那里的分配相关的欺诈行为。第 9 章解释说，尽管他试图为多年前被俘的阿帕奇囚犯寻找家园，但他们还是被转移到了西尔堡，许多人在那里死亡。当他那年晚些时候生病并最终于 1895 年 1 月去世时，他正在研究几个问题。

即使在这个时代，关于印第安部落的最善意的联邦法律或政策也是同化主义的，并试图削弱部落主权。Mathes 承认 Painter 是这一趋势的一部分。然而，在加利福尼亚州，他在重新获得土地方面发挥了重要作用，并与与分配和租赁相关的腐败进行了斗争，这些腐败将美洲原住民的土地和……