Andrew Jackson's Speech To Congress On Indian Removal

Andrew Jackson was a General in The United States army, and the 7th president, throughout his presidency he experienced many struggles with the Native Americans like wars and land disputes. In the 1830s he wanted to end these conflicts so he put in place the Indian Removal Act of 1830. I believe Andrew Jackson rightly and correctly removed the Indians. Even though many Indians died along the way Jackson had a reason behind what he did and should not be to blamed for their deaths.

The limits of any state or territory now formed to be guaranteed to the indians tribes as long as

The history and the establishment of various Indian tribes in America took the path of revolution by human civil rights institutions. The Indian American citizen had to form a movement whose main aim was demand for their rights from the Native Americans and the government by sorting for cultural independent protection, advocating of their human rights and restoration of economic rights. Independence of the human race do not always come as an easy task but is involves a sequence of efforts against the violation of rights by their native colonies.

Later, many questions arose regarding if the newly acquired territory should allow slavery. In the attempt to solve this, Henry Clay led the Missouri Compromise which admitted Missouri as a slave state, and Maine as a free state creating a balance in Congress. This led to the belief that later in the future slavery be prohibited north of the southern border of Missouri in the remaining of the Louisiana Purchase. The issue of slavery continued to be an issue as the nation expanded because the Missouri Compromise didn’t apply to new territories that were not part of the Louisiana Purchase. By the new land acquired, the Southern economy increased because of the “Cotton King”, which also increased the labor in order to maintain the newly achieved economy. One the other hand, the North believed that the expansion of slavery was very small because they didn’t depend on slavery for their economic survival. The North relied on on textile industry on southern crops was increased by the creation of the cotton gin. Many Americans kept migrating to the west despite after the Missouri Compromise was adopted. Many would cross to the Oregon Territory, which belonged to the British and many more settled in Mexican territory

Long ago on the great plains, the buffalo roamed and the Native Americans lived amongst each other. They were able to move freely across the lands until the white men came and concentrated them into certain areas. Today there are more than five-hundred different tribes with different beliefs and history. Native Americans still face problems about the horrific history they went through and today 's discrimination. The removal of American Indian tribes is one of the most tragic events in American history. There are many treaties that have been signed by American representatives and people of Indian tribes that guaranteed peace and the values of the Indian territories. The treaties were to assure that fur trade would continue without interruption. The American people wanting Indian land has led to violent conflict between the two. Succeeding treaties usually forced the tribes to give up their land to the United States government. There were laws made for Native American Displacement that didn’t benefit the Native Americans, these laws still have long lasting effects on them today, and there was a huge number of Native Americans killed for many reasons.

Although the horrors of the American Civil War and Reconstruction within Indian Territory were fresh. Yet, the presence of Indian Territory changed drastically between 1865 and 1889, because of the “Second Trail of Tears”, the unrest of the Southern Plains tribes of western Indian Territory, and the impact of U.S. Polices on Indian Territory.

Andrew Jackson, The United States seventh president, was possibly one of the worst human beings to be president and treated the Native Indians horribly. He, was a bully and used his position to get acts and petitions like the Indian Removal Act passed, to help push Native Indians around so he could get his own way. The Indian Removal Act in and of itself seemingly doesn’t contain that much power, however it was all the power Jackson needed. The circumstances of Jackson’s character and the debates surrounding the Act also lend and interesting lens to examine what Jackson intentions were. When looking at Jackson and how he managed to relocate the Native it becomes substantially more integral to examine all the documents with a wide scope to see how he even managed the relocation of Natives.

In Barney’s essay, his main contention was to show that slavery was solely based on expansion into new territories. This demonstrates how the diffusion of slaves through expansion into other territories helped southerners avoid the issue of having too many slaves to control in one area. Barney sets up his thesis by using sections which function as clockwork: one section provides context and the next provides information about the topic. One of the points that the author brings up is that the expansion of slavery was based on the land as the “economic elixir” (1). The quality of the land determined where expansionists were interested, which was why California was so appealing. Within a generation, planters monopolized the agricultural wealth of any given area because Southern Institutions were

With the discovery of the New World came a whole lot of new problems. Native American Indians lived in peace and harmony until European explorers interrupted that bliss with the quest for money and power. The European explorers brought with them more people. These people and their descendants starting pushing the natives out of their homes, out of their land, far before the 1800s. However, in the 1800s, the driving force behind the removal of the natives intensified. Thousands of indians during this time were moved along the trail known as Nunna dual Tsung, meaning “The Trail Where They Cried” (“Cherokee Trail of Tears”). The Trail of Tears was not only unjust and unconstitutional, but it also left many indians sick, heartbroken, and dead.

The Indian Removal Act, inspired by Andrew Jackson; the 7th president of the US and the enhanced ambition for American settlers to find more land in the southwestern regions of North America. The Indian Removal Act enabled Jackson the power of negotiating removal treaties with Indian tribes east of the Mississippi. Among these tribes were: Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaws and Seminoles. Very few authenticated traits were signed. The Choctaws were the only tribe to agree without any issues. All other attempts resulted in War and blood shed for both white settlers and Indians. The conflict with the U.S. and Indians lasted up until 1837. In 1838 & 1839 Jackson forced the relocation of the remaining Cherokee Indians;

A summary comparison of views regarding the Indian Removal Act of 1830, Was it an act of humanitarianism intended to help and save the Native American culture from the white settlers, as Robert V. Remini has argued? Or was his intent to destroy the tribal culture and to get rid of the Native Americans, as Anthony F.C Wallace has argued?

In 1830, congress passed The Indian Removal Act, which became a law 2 days later by President Andrew Jackson. The law was to reach a fairly, voluntarily, and peacefully agreement for the Indians to move. It didn’t permit the president to persuade them unwillingly to give up their land by using force. But, “President Jackson and his government

Long ago on the great plains, the buffalo roamed and the Native Americans lived amongst each other. They were able to move freely across the lands until the white men came and concentrated them into certain areas. Today there are more than five-hundred different tribes with different beliefs and history. Native Americans still face problems about the horrific history they went through and today 's discrimination. The removal of American Indian tribes is one of the most tragic events in American history. There are many treaties that have been signed by American representatives and people of Indian tribes that guaranteed peace and the values of the Indian territories. The treaties were to assure that fur trade would continue without interruption. The American people wanting Indian land has led to violent conflict between the two. Succeeding treaties usually forced the tribes to give up their land to the United States government. There were laws made for Native American Displacement that didn’t benefit the Native Americans, these laws still have long lasting effects on them today, and there was a huge number of Native Americans killed for many reasons.

The seventh president of the United States; Andrew Jackson, was not only notorious for his success as a general but also for his actions as president. The Removal Policy is still discussed today because of the question of whether or not the removal of Native Americans benefited them or not. The intent of Jackson's actions is controversial because it is not clear if he acted in the best interest of Native Americans or for white settlers. Robert Remini's writing Andrew Jackson and his Indian Wars he concludes that Jackson's removal act was the only way to protect the Native Americans from conflict with impeding settlers. Albert Cave writes in Abuse of Power: Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal act of 1830, that Jackson broke promises

the hands of businessmen, laying everything out on the market. Unfamiliar with the ways of politics and economics, tribal communities would initially be supportive of the idea that they finally have the land to themselves and may be able to uses it without governmental surveyance. In many cases, mismanagement of business lead to dead ends and bankrupcies. Heavy in dept, the rights to the land goes to creditors ready to expoit. In a particular case, the Navajo Forest Products Industry (NFPI), who occupied forest land that was almost depleted of old growth, conducted logging of younger trees until the forest was devastated. Normally, such plans would have to go through Washington’s Bureau of Indian Affairs via EIS, ESA, etc. to meet several requirements prior to approval. According to BIA’s reasoning, NFPI was exempted from having to conduct an audit or EIS.