In the Indian Removal Act role-play activity, there were a couple strong arguments that got me to side with them as I was part of the Congress. I felt that the missionaries and the farmers had the most persuasive arguments because they had multiple facts that backed up what they were trying to say. The other groups had minimal detail on answers and could not answer questions that made their arguments even weaker. The Andrew Jackson group especially dissatisfied me because they had about five weak answers to questions and had no fact that backed up their answers. Overall, I think the activity was extremely one sided because the people who wanted the Indians to stay, had much more facts that convinced others to side with their argument.
In the role-play activity, there were two groups for the Indian Removal Act, two groups against it and a group trying to create peace between both sides. The missionaries goal was creating peace between the groups and in order to do so, argued against the act. They had the best argument because they stated in order to have peace, the Indians and the Americans have to stay and work together. The Andrew Jackson Administration had no
…show more content…
The Cherokee did not support their answers well because they just restated how they were Indians, did not want to move and were treated poorly by the Andrew Jackson Administration. The Andrew Jackson Administration just did not have any responses to answers. When asked if there was any endurance there would be no harm if the Indians decided not to move, they just stated money would be given if the Indians did move. Lastly, when asked about when Andrew Jackson stated they would never concern the Indians about their land, the group just made up an answer in order to respond. These two groups answers dissatisfied me because there was very little detail or fact behind their
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.
In 1838, the Cherokee Indian Removal Act forced Cherokee and Creek Indians out of Georgia on a 5,045 mile walk all the way to the farthest west land that the United States had at the time, Oklahoma[1]. This event is now known as The Trail of Tears known for the many tears shed by the Indians that had to travel on the trail. The main reason for their removal from the premises was because of the gold that was discovered in the land of the now Hall County or Dahlonega. People have their opinions on whether the Creek and Cherokee should have been removed, to be honest, I am on the fence about this topic. I can recognize the great injustice that was made to the Indians but I also see that this action allowed for growth in Georgia and its economy, which contributed to growth for the United States as a whole. If I had to choose, I would say that the Cherokee Indians should not have been removed from their territory. For one, they were settled in their land before the english came and were in a way civilized. Two, the Indian Removal Act should never have been approved and was invalid for a few reasons. And finally, it was immoral to remove them from their land and didn't have any right to do so.
In 1830, President Andrew Jackson addressed Congress stating two Native tribes had accepted the terms of the Indian Removal Act. Jackson said he hoped the two tribes consent would set an example for the other tribes to leave because he thought leaving was an advantage for them. He explained, “It puts an end to all possible danger of collision between the authorities of the General and State governments on account of the Indians.” The two different civilizations didn’t agree, which lead to violent conflicts that lasted centuries. For thirty years, the United States had tried to come to find a way to get the two civilizations reach an agreement. The Indian Removal Act became the United States government’s solution that ended the violent encounters. This Act removed the Natives from northern Tennessee, southern Louisiana, western Alabama and the state of Mississippi, which helped the United
Gold was discovered near Cherokee territory in Georgia. As result, Georgia desired to remove the Cherokees and relocate the Cherokees to lands west of the Mississippi river. This struck a major debate. Andrew Jackson was known to support the removal of Native Americans, so the state of Georgia took advantage of the scenario. With little difficulty, the Indian Removal Act was passed in 1830. The Cherokees did not relocate without a civilized fight. They sent several documents to Congress to argue their case. These documents included three arguments to support the sovereignty of the Cherokee nation. These three arguments were Great Britain saw the Cherokees as separated nation from the Colonists, George Washington saw them as an independent nation, and the Cherokees had the same natural rights as the United States.
“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 very controversial during its time, receiving influence from individuals, local, state and mostly by the federal government. This act gave the president, Andrew Jackson, the authority to make transactions with Indian tribes in the Southern region of the United States. The Indian Removal Act was a deal made by President Andrew Jackson with the Indian tribes, forcing them to leave their occupied land, which happened to be federal territories west of the Mississippi River. President Andrew Jackson’s primary method in Indian Removal was his speech to Congress regarding his opinions on the act, which included many positive outcomes that would happen if the Indians were to leave the territory. He claimed that this act would not only benefit the United States as a whole, but it would also benefit the Indian people. This benefit was called “Manifest Destiny” or the idea of the United States expanding its territories from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific. This expansion would benefit the country not just economically, but agriculturally as well. However, “Manifest Destiny” was only an idea, and in order for this idea to become a reality, the governments had to take action. This action in entirety was the removal of the Indian tribes from the southern regions, making them travel through very harsh conditions so that Americans could settle in their former homeland. Overall, the American government wanted to rid the
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).
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 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 early 1800’s was a very important time for America. The small country was quickly expanding. With the Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark expedition, America almost tripled in size by 1853. However, even with the amount of land growing, not everyone was welcomed with open arms. With the expansion of the country, the white Americans decided that they needed the Natives out.
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;
President Jackson signed the Indian Removal Act 1830, that gave federal funding to the indian tribes to move further west. The Cherokee indians along with many other tribes fought back, and Jackson argued that there were two different choices he could make. Choice number one was extermination which would have meant to remove all of the indians from the area. Choice number two was through
There has always been a big debate on whether the Cherokee Indians should have or should not have been removed from the land they resided on. Although the common consensus of the whites was for removal, and for the Cherokees it was against removal, there were some individuals on each side that disagreed with their groups’ decision. The Cherokee Indians should have been removed from their homeland because the Cherokees would not have been able to survive on their own with the way they were living, they would not have been able to exist amidst a white population, and if they were removed, the whites would have helped them create a new and prosperous civilization.
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