Indian Removal Act Of Greed Essay

“…I saw the helpless Cherokees arrested and dragged from their homes, and driven at the bayonet point into the stockades. And in the chill of a drizzling rain on an October morning I saw them loaded like cattle or sheep into six hundred and forty-five wagons and started toward the west…” Private John G. Burnett remembered on December 11, 1890, his eightieth birthday. Private Burnett recalled the cold fall morning in 1938 when he accompanied his new Cherokee family on their forced relocation from different parts of Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia to west of the Mississippi river, land set aside by the United States government for the relocation of Native Americans during the 19th century. The forced relocation of five major Native American tribes to Indian Territory was the result of former President Andrew Jackson’s approval of the Indian Removal Act signed into law by congress on May 28, 1930. The Indian Removal Act gave Jackson the funds and authority to forcibly remove the Native Americans from their land in order to give their valuable property to white settlers who had begun to inhabit the surrounding areas.

The Indian Removal Act was sponsored racism as seen by the words of Andrew Jackson. One example was when he wrote, “… enable them to purse happiness in their own way and under their own rude institutions.” The use of the words “rude institutions” implies that the Indians were less then Americans and that their way of living was incorrect. Also Jackson called the Indians savages but called Americans happy people. He felt that the Indians did nothing important with the land there for Americans had the right to this land. This showed that he believed that Americans deserved more then the Indians because the Indians had less extensive cities and farms. Continuing on, Jackson also referenced the Indians as “red men of the South and West” which took value away from the Native American Culture and made them seem like a less civilized culture. Lastly, Jackson explained, “… under the protection of the government and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, christian, community.” By saying this Jackson is implying that Indians are disorganized and uncivilized, and that only by the help of the Americans will they maybe become a good community. This exalts the American and degrades the Indian people and their

Did you know that thousands of American Indians traveled half the country on foot? This was because of the Indian Removal Act. The Indian Removal Act is an act which says that the government has the power to move the American Indians to a specified location as long as the American Indians can keep that land forever. The government moved most of them to the now established Kansas because the explorer who explored Kansas called Kansas a desolate desert full of tribes who have no homes. Many American Indians did not like the Indian Removal Act because of the struggle it caused.

The Indian Removal Act signed by the president of the United States, Andrew Jackson, caused controversy and the brutal and merciless suffering of the Native Americans during The Trail of Tears. The beginning of the 1830’s was a time when the Native Americans occupied The Deep South. This, however, was problematic for the white farmers who were in need of farmland in order to increase their production of cotton. Nevertheless, Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, coerced the Native Americans to relocate their civilizations to lands west of the Mississippi. A close examination at the tribes that were compelled to move west would show that they were civilized. Thus, Andrew Jackson was not justified in his policy towards

The Indian Removal has long been a debated issue. The two sides had radically different viewpoints on the ordeal that helped shape America. The Indians, naturally, were against their removal from their homelands, and they had two major protest against their removal. The first reason was the fact that they were there first by thousands of years only for white men to invade and tell them to live somewhere else because the white men were superior to the natives. The second reason was that the U.S government kept breaking treaties and was forcing out tribes that had gone through the proper channels for their land.

Jacksonian DBQ The Jacksonian rhetoric of political democracy, individual liberty, and economic opportunity was certainly one full of contradictions. Politically, while the administration promoted majority rule and increased participation in politics, the only people benefitted from the policies were the members of its own. The Jacksonians were not egalitarians of any kind, doing little to challenge racial discrimination and supervising one of the harshest attacks on Native American tribes. While they strove to protect equality of economic opportunity by attacking elitist organizations such as the federal-owned BUS and Charles River Bridge monopoly, the economic utopia never became more than a dream in such that the measures acted as a springboard for a string of devastating economic downturns (for example, the Panic of 1837).

In Document D, John Ross said, “Ever since [the whites came] we have been made to drink of the bitter cup of humiliation; treated like dogs... our country and the graves of our fathers torn from us.” As you can see, the Indians feel sick and tired of being controlled by Americans. They want to be independent and want to live along the graves of their ancestors without it being taken away. In conclusion, the Indian Removal act caused Indians to be treated very poorly due to their land being forcibly taken away and walking the Trail of

Robert V. Remini argues that Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act of 1830 was socially motivated by humanitarian impulses, and that Jackson’s actions where driven by the desire to save the culture and populace of the Native

Many historians argue that the Indian Removal Act was not justified. “Members of Congress argued that Jackson violated the Constitution by refusing to enforce treaties that guaranteed Indian land rights.” (Cheathem, 452). In 1791, America signed a treaty with the Cherokees with the intent on “civilizing” them into the traditions of America. By the 1820’s, most Cherokees were “living in log cabins instead of houses made

The Indian Removal Act was an atrocity done in the name of the common man. The want of the land for agriculture by the common man and the discovery of gold on the same land caused the common man and Andrew Jackson to desire the land even more. According to Document C, Tecumseh questioned that

The year is 1830. You are out in your farm, gathering food for your dinner. Suddenly, Cherokee Indians burst out of the nearby woods and drag you away by your hair. At their camp, they tied you to a wood pole and build a fire around your feet. The last sensation you feel is sweltering heat as a wave of black consumes you. This is a small taste of what it was like back in 1830. Before the United States was as large as it is now, the U.S. kept bumping elbows with its neighbors, the Indians. President Andrew Jackson introduced the Indian Removal Act to give the U.S. some room. The Creeks and Choctaw Indians already moved out, and only the Cherokee Indians remained. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 and withdrawal of the Cherokee was justified because they were bloodthirsty, the U.S. needed room to grow, and it’s not the worst thing in the world for them.

This tragic loss of Native American culture is heartbreaking even in today's society. As was ruefully stated by Native American chief Santana, "These soldiers cut down our timber, they kill my buffalo; and when I see that, my heart feels like bursting; I feel sorry." (Document G) Since its inception in 1776, the United States was known as one of the most prominent advocates for freedom and liberty. Its emphasis on liberty and equality results from this nation’s dedication to and founding upon the Christian proposition that all men are created equal by God. Yet if this was truly taken to heart, then why were they so hedonistic against the Native Americans? Tensions between the tribes and the citizens of America drastically increased over the years of Manifest Destiny. Expanding the boundaries of the United States was in many ways a cultural war. While the US fought with the natives, the real power struggle occurred within. "Controversy grew over Texas, its annexation, and its boundaries. Not all Congressmen wanted to add Texas to the US as fear of a potentially large slave territory threatened the balance of Congress" (Background Essay Adapted) The desire of southerners to find more lands suitable for cotton

I disagree with the Indian Removal Act. One reason is while the Native Americans were being removed, they traveled on a path called the Trail of Tears, where many Native Americans died. Also, the Indian Removal Act took away most of the freedoms the Native Americans had. This is why I disagree with the Indian Removal Act.

“I fought through the civil war and have seen men shot to pieces and slaughtered by thousands, but the Cherokee removal was the cruelest work I ever knew”, remarked a Georgia soldier who had participated in the removal of Indian Natives during the mid-1800’s. As a result of the Indian Removal Act, Indian natives have been perceived as mistreated and cheated throughout history. The Indian Removal Act was passed during the presidency of Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830. This act granted authorization to the president to exchange unsettled lands west of Mississippi for Indian lands residing in state borders. Initially, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed to expand the Southern United State for farmland and to aid the government in furthering our development as a nation. With this plan in mind, the government provided money to establish districts in the west of the Mississippi River for the Indian natives, ensured trade and exchange in those districts, allowed Native Indian tribes to be compensated for the cost of their removal and the improvements of their homesteads, and also pay one years’ worth subsistence to those Native Indians who relocated to the west.

While the government may have been thinking for the betterment of their people, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was not a justified action. The settlers bullied and attacked the original inhabitants, the Indians, into giving up their land. Perhaps to the government this may have seemed justified considering it was beneficial to them, but they essentially stole land that was not theirs to take. In an attempt to feign compassion for these original inhabitants, President Andrew Jackson states in his 1829 case to congress that this Act will help the Indians, “…to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community” (Jackson, First Annual Message to Congress, 2).