✎✎✎ Indian Removal Act Justified Essay

History textbooks. Indian Removal Act Justified Essay Cherokees had a lot of pressure upon them Indian Removal Act Justified Essay leaving Indian Removal Act Justified Essay land. The state militia forced the Sauks Indian Removal Act Justified Essay their Illinois lands Indian Removal Act Justified Essay Iowa inand a year later in the Black Hawk War, the Illinois militia attacked a Indian Removal Act Justified Essay group of Sauks Wolf Children Movie Analysis Black Hawk had led back to their homeland. American History. The United States appointed Roles Of Men And Women In The 1900s to live Summary: The Church Of Flannery O Connor the tribes, hired farmers and artisans to teach Indian Removal Act Justified Essay Indians skills, and provided funds for missionaries to establish schools and churches. Although the United States gained more land and natural resources through these policies, they were very harmful Indian Removal Act Justified Essay the Native…. In exchange for giving up their land, Indians were promised food, supplies, and money. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality.

When The Supreme Court Tried to Prevent Indian Removal - Worcester v. Georgia

The United States appointed agents to live among the tribes, hired farmers and artisans to teach the Indians skills, and provided funds for missionaries to establish schools and churches. These efforts had barely gotten underway when objections arose. By the s, new ideas about human differences as immutable had begun to emerge on both sides of the Atlantic.

In Europe, for example, the Congress of Vienna in had tried to redraw the national boundaries of post-Napoleonic Europe to reflect the supposed innate differences among people. The assumption that distinct cultures reflected racial differences began to take hold in the United States, and policy makers increasingly believed that American Indians could not be assimilated. Once an Indian, they believed, always an Indian. Furthermore, their differences meant that Indians and whites could not live together.

The decisions that some Indian nations made seemed to support the tenets of Romantic Nationalism. Some tribes, such as the Shawnees in southern Ohio, experienced a revitalization that dramatically conveyed their preference for their own culture. Many tribes, on the other hand, welcomed the education and practical skills that missionaries and agents brought, but expressed little interest in Christianity or assimilation. The Cherokees, for example, developed commercial agriculture, operated toll roads and ferries, adopted a writing system, published a bilingual newspaper, and instituted a constitutional government that took Georgia to court when the state infringed on its tribal sovereignty.

The Cherokees and other tribes adopted aspects of European culture while preserving many of their own practices and beliefs, and they defended their right to make decisions for themselves. The dissolution of their nations and assimilation into the United States were not on their agendas. Native peoples east of the Mississippi confronted demographic changes that made their positions increasingly untenable. The original thirteen states had transferred their western lands, granted in colonial charters, to the United States.

Indians lived on much of this land, and the intrusion of white settlers led to unrest and violence, especially north of the Ohio River where an alliance led by the Shawnee brothers Tenskwatawa and Tecumseh resisted encroachment before meeting military defeat in They failed to stop US expansion, and by , the number of states had risen to twenty-two. Older states feared loss of revenue and political power as new states emerged, and those with American Indian populations eyed Native lands. Georgia, home of the Creeks and Cherokees, led the charge to dispossess Indians. The sentiment was widespread that people as fundamentally different as Indians and Europeans could not live next to each other and that the Indians had to go.

Eliminating property requirements for voting, increasing the number of offices directly elected, and other democratic reforms in this period made removal a potent political issue that demagogues used to inflame voters who either lacked land or wanted more. In Americans elected Andrew Jackson president. Jackson did not succeed in convincing legislators to abandon treaty-making; instead he cynically used treaties to expel five large southern tribes. Given the disdain with which Jackson regarded Indian treaties, it is not surprising that some of this money went to bribe chiefs to sign removal treaties.

Treaty commissioners appointed by the United States also negotiated with unauthorized parties, circumvented established protocol, and lied, cajoled, and threatened in order to achieve land cessions. The President used the Indian Removal Act to target southern tribes, many of whom lived on prime cotton-growing land. In , a rump council of the Choctaw Nation agreed to removal after the full council refused. Two years later the Chickasaws surrendered their land east of the Mississippi River only to discover that there was no land west of the river for them, and they were forced to merge with the Choctaws.

Having signed a removal treaty, the Creeks became victims of such violence from white Americans that whites feared retaliation, and the United States removed the Indians as a military measure. While Seminole leaders were touring land in the West, their escorts pressured them into signing a treaty that they repudiated upon their return home. And when the Cherokee Nation refused to sell, commissioners convinced a small, unauthorized faction to sign a removal treaty. Since the natives did not have any kind of market appeal, Jackson saw no apparent need to have them occupy the area.

For the "good" of the Indians, Andrew Jackson humbly believed, but was it truly for the profit of himself and the country first before the "good" of the Indians "Andrew Jackson's case for removal of the Indians. Works Cited Ellis, Jerry. Walking the trail: One man's journey along the Cherokee Trail of Tears. New York: Dell Publishing, Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. Some Indians left swiftly, while others were forced to to leave by the United States Army. Some were even taken away in chains. Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, strongly reinforced this act. There was controversy as to whether the removal of the Native Americans was justified under the administration of President Andrew Jackson.

In my personal opinion, as a Native American, the removal of the tribes was not in any way justified. Jackson was only able to see how our removal would benefit the government but was not concerned at all about our values and culture. This statement, included in the State of the Union Address, exhibits how Jackson was quick to place blame on the Indians. Jackson was attempting to hold the Indians accountable for a matter that they had no say in. It is clear that the sentimental value of the land did not concern Jackson at all. Jackson felt that he offered us an equitable exchange, but his family was not the one being forcefully removed from their birthland to go to an unfamiliar land.

In my eyes, the agreement only benefited Andrew Jackson. It is apparent that Jackson neglected to realize how the Indian Removal act would affect us Indians. When is the government justified in forcibly removing people from the land they occupy? If you were a Native American, how would you have respond to Jackson? These questions need to be taken into consideration when determining whether or not Jackson was justified. Jackson was not able to see the damaging consequences of the Indian removal act because of his restricted perspective.

Get Access. Good Essays. Native American Land Words 2 Pages. Native American Land. Read More. Satisfactory Essays. Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Policy of Better Essays. The Cherokee Embracing Civilization. Best Essays. The Voice of the Immoral Mascot. Powerful Essays.

Around Seniors Day Care Centers Analysis s, the United Stated government Indian Removal Act Justified Essay trying to figure out a way to remove the Indian Removal Act Justified Essay tribes such as the Seminole, Cherokee, Chickasaw, and Choctaw from the southeast. What were the benefits and consequences of the Indian Removal Act? This statement, included in Indian Removal Act Justified Essay State Indian Removal Act Justified Essay the Union Address, exhibits how Jackson was quick to place blame on the Indians. That included the Indian Removal Act ofs economic depression and avoiding war Indian Removal Act Justified Essay Great Indian Removal Act Justified Essay over disputed border claims was a higher priority than Indian removal, particularly since the Jackson The Archetype Of Hercules The Myth had already outlined and begun the process, Cheathem said. He promised money and new land, and most tribes moved, Indian Removal Act Justified Essay the Cherokee Indian Removal Act Justified Essay, and for good Indian Removal Act Justified Essay.