Was The Indian Removal Act Justified

The Market Revolution occurred during the early nineteenth century where America was economically transforming. Road and canals were being created and that changed how people could distribute their products easier and father than before. New machinery was being used which helped developed new technologies. So how was the Market Revolution related to the Indian removal? During this time period Andrew Jackson was elected president of the United States in 1828.

The government, and most of the new inhabitants of the New World, believed that the Indians were “unruly, violent creatures” that were beneath them (Masaryk University, Relations Between English Settlers and Indians in 17th Century New England, 42). The only reason why several Indians accepted the terms of Jackson's land policies was due to his skillful rhetoric and sensible speaking skills. Furthermore, the Indians lacked experience in having to make highly significant accommodations among, and for, their people. Jackson had a vast history of public disgust for the Indian society. Prior to his presidency, Andrew Jackson started with a military background in Tennessee that primarily involved revolts against the Indians. He also led a campaign against a group of Indians known as the “Red Sticks” (Cayton, Contact Points: American Frontiers from the Mohawk Valley to the Mississippi, 173). Through this campaign Jackson showed extreme disgust and revulsion towards the Indian people, and consistently discussed how he never felt America was safe so long as the Indians were around. These policies were destructive to the Indian population, and further conveyed Andrew Jackson’s prejudice attitude towards the Indians. Jackson's land policies eventually solely benefitted the white settlers, by taking most land

“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.

The Indian Removal Act was affirmed by President Andrew Jackson when gold was found in Georgia. On the trail over 4,000 Cherokees lost their lives and lost their lives because of the cold, hunger, and diseases.

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 the years leading up to the Indian Removal Act, which was the initial cause of the Trail of Tears, the United States was in a shift. The country was seeing an unrivaled influx of European settlers looking for careers and land. This caused population to skyrocket, in fact in the years 1790-1840, the United States saw a 350% increase in population. In other words, the need for fertile land and viable property was high. At the same time, attempts at assimilation of Indians into American society were proving to be futile. Americans saw the Indians as “noble savages”, who were uncivilized but able to be fit for society if they were converted to Christianity and adopted Anglo-European culture and behavior. With the growing need for land and the rise in tension between Natives and fearful white settlers, something needed to be done in the eyes of the American people. These two things combined is what really set up the foreground for what would become the Indian Removal Act. President Andrew Jackson, in

The Indian Removal act of 1830 was passed by President Jackson. President Jackson wanted the Natives land so he made false treaties with them in order to speed up the process of taking their land. Some of the Natives agreed to go to Indian territory on their own but, the majority of them didn’t like the idea of leaving their home. Many of the natives fought and raided the settlers many of the natives tried to make peace with the white men. Soon many of the Natives grew weary and finally decided to cede their land and move to Indian Territory. Still many Natives had to be forced to make the journey. Many of the natives didn’t survive the journey. The Five Tribes that were removed were the Choctaw,Creek,Chickasaw,Cherokee, and the Seminole.

“What the Removal Bill did not do was as significant as what it did. It did not define precisely the constitutional rights of any tribe that had been removed. It did not make mandatory the allocation of funds for tribal assistance if Congress wanted the money for anything else. It specified no machinery for carrying out the removal. Also, it made no mention that in 1828 gold had been discovered on Cherokee land at Dahlonega, Georgia, and it drew no lines between state or federal rights” (Jahoda 41).

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;

This historical document is a transcription of President Andrew Jackson’s Second Annual Message to Congress. Before his second annual message to Congress, Jackson had already signed the Indian Removal Act into law. The Indian Removal Act allowed the President to grant lands in the west to Indian tribes that agreed to give up their lands in the east (“Indian Treaties and the Removal Act”). In his message, Jackson claims that Indian Removal Act is beneficial to everyone involved. Although Jackson outlines the benefits of speeding up the process of removing Indian tribes from their homelands, in reality, the Indian Removal Act does not benefit Indian tribes because it only leads to a forced migration, reinforces prejudice towards the Indians,

This investigation will explore the question: To what extent was the Indian Removal Act necessary in the eyes of the U.S. Government?

In regards to the Cherokee people, they had taken every right step by the rules of a Eurocentric society to earn the right to stay on their own land. In 1832 the Worchester vs Georgia took place. The plaintiff, the Cherokee Nation won the case. John Marshall declared they were considered a distinct community with clear borders and had the right to govern their own territory. However, Jackson ignored this and went on to remove the Cherokees forcefully. Since what Jackson did was against the ruling of the court his acts were their fore unconstitutional. Since the Indian Removal Act, in regards to the Cherokees, was fundamentally stealing, the act cannot be justified (document I).

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

Action was necessary and accepted as rational by the American people because of their unsustainable racism and greed for land to expand their settlements. The intent was not to burden the Native Americans, but “Jackson fully expected the Indians to thrive in their new surroundings, educate their children, acquire the skills of white civilization so as to improve their living conditions, and become citizens of the United States”(Remini 213). In order to become citizens of the United States the Indians were expected to conform to the societal normalities of the white citizens. Jackson put the removal act in place to diffuse conflict and encourage Native Americans to accept the American way of life as their new culture. The idea was to act in the most humane manner that would help both sides, not necessarily to disregard the Indians heritage or way of life.

In 1830, the Indian Removal Act was passed, a law which allowed the United States government to remove American Indians, specifically the Creek, Cherokee, Chickasaw, and Choctaw, from their ancestral lands to be moved to the western frontier. This act was suggested by Jefferson, but finally passed during Andrew Jackson’s presidency. The Removal of