Pros And Cons Of The Indian Removal Act Of 1790

I think there are four main connections that can be made between this piece and the U.S policies in 1830, and all four points are about the four distinct groups present in the piece. The group on the far left is putting up a cross, which symbolizes both how Europeans moved west to spread Christianity and also symbolizes that the actions taken were made in the name of Christianity. In 1830 people, including Jeremiah Evarts were still trying to convert the Native Americans; despite trying to convert the natives, Evarts was firmly against the Indian Removal Act. I think that the piece above represents the conflicting nature of Evarts argument that the natives were people; however, they still needed to assimilate to a certain degree before they

READING QUESTIONS Day 128: Native Americans and the New Republic: Q. Why did the Americans want the natives to peacefully conform to their new American ways? A. Q. What did the Indians want to do when the Americans asked them to peacefully conform to their civilized ways? A. The Indians wanted to keep their Indian culture and traditions, while still civilizing themselves.

The Indian Removal act was a complete step in the wrong direction for our Nation. This act gave federal government power to relocate the Native Americans in the East. This occurred in the West of the Mississippi River in about 1830-1840. About 60,000 natives suffered from the Indian removal Act. Americans should be against Indian Removal Act because it was a huge event of discrimination, removed the Native Americans harshly and violently from their land, and treated Natives unfairly.

Although this treaty explicitly stated the Indians’ rights to land, history- and even the Act itself- proved that Americans followed it very loosely, if at all. The Trade and Intercourse Act seemed to dampen the consequences of violating Indian land rights since it included the phrase, “not exceeding,” when referring to the jail- time and fees that any invasive Americans had to pay. 3. Andrew Jackson proposed moving the Indians because he wanted to end the tensions between the Federal and State Governments concerning Natives, to condense the Indian population in a single expanse of land, to open the area between Tennessee and Louisiana to the whites, and to prevent Indian and American conflicts. In the second paragraph of his Message to Congress in1829, Jackson said that the United States should move the Indians because it would put “an end to all possible danger of collisions between the authorities of the General and State Governments on account of the Indians.”

The white men were trying to force the Cherokee out of their own land. The white men made the Indian removal act to force the Indians out no matter what. The historical question means, should the Cherokee leave or stay and if they stay they will lose all their ways but if they leave they could have their own land. People might disagree because they feel the Cherokee owned the land before any white man would have even known that land existed. My answer to the question is for the Cherokee to leave and just not bother with the men trying to make them change their ways.

During the early to mid 1800s, the colonization of “Indians” and subordination of “women’s rights in the American society,” was very essential to those in authority. They were perceived as a mere means to an end by promises of a better life in exchange for “land and work.” Although locals complied, those in offices took advantage by using antagonistic tactics in achieving wealth, power, and ownership. However, these actions lead to “The First Seminole War, The Monroe Doctrine, Andrew Jackson’s leadership, The Indian Removal Act, The California Gold Rush, The Seneca Falls Convention, and the Birth of the Republican Party.” Although some Americans have been perceived as heroes, their actions have said otherwise about their character.

This essay considers how Cherokees responded to the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This Act, promoted by the seventh President of the United States Andrew Jackson, enabled the United States government to relocate the “Five Civilized Tribes” to reservations west of the Mississippi River. The majority of Americans supported removing Southeastern Amerindians. American settlers were eager to gain access to Cherokee lands in Georgia. The Indian Removal Act resulted in the mass transplantation of Indian tribes known as the “Trail of Tears.”

From a historical point of view cultural assimilation happens when a person or a group loses its native culture to the dominant group in their society. On the other hand, cultural pluralism takes place when smaller group within a larger society are able to maintain their culture and belief in which are accepted in the wider society. The process of assimilation is slow and gradual because it take some time to for a person or groups to fully make an adjustment into their new society. In history, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed by Congress under the administration of President Andrew Jackson. The law states that the president can authorize to negotiate with southern Native American tribes for their removal to federal territory west

The Indians did establish schools, develop written language and laws and even became sedentary farmers. Even though they had done all this to become a citizen they were still not recognized. They gave up hunting to adapt the European-American culture. The policy was designed to remove the Native Americans by the American government. The Indian Removal Act was not just created in the 1830’s but was culminated in the nineteenth century.

The Indian Removal Act authorized Jackson to give the Indians land west of the Mississippi in exchange for their land in the states, but could not force them to leave. He violated and broke commitments that he even negotiated with them. He tried to bribe the Indians and even threatened some of them. Alfred Cave organizes his article thematically and is trying to prove

The United States gave the Indians time to move west and those that had not done so by choice were forced. The removal of the Indians was a long going issue for The United States, that no one knew just how to deal with. “Some officials in the early years of the American republic, such as President George Washington, believed that the best way to solve this “Indian problem” was simply to “civilize” the Native

Under influence of president Andrew Jackson, the congress was urged in 1830 to pass the Indian Removal Act, with the goal of relocated many Native Americans in the East territory, the west of Mississippi river. The Trail of tears was made for the interest of the minorities. Indeed, if president Jackson wished to relocate the Native Americans, it was because he wanted to take advantage of the gold he found on their land. Then, even though the Cherokee won their case in front the supreme court, the president and congress pushed them out(Darrenkamp).

Jose Romo History 101 Wednesday breakout session Primary Source paper #2 Question # 1 October 28th, 2015 "There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice" Charles de Montesquieu. These words by Montesquieu seem to fit not only the American Revolution but also the Cherokee Removal. The actions of some of the Cherokee people that refused to give up their ancestral land may support the “uncivilized barbaric savages” claims of the Americans of European ancestry; however, the primary source documents in "The Cherokee Removal" demonstrate a different interpretation of the Cherokee people and their struggles as well as vindicate their actions. First, the primary source documents in "The

The Indian Removal Act forced the Native Americans to move away from their ancestral homes. Gabrielle Tayac, Edwin Schupman, and Genevieve Simermeyer noted, “Native peoples have created thriving societies along the shores of numerous rivers that feed into the beautiful and environmentally rich Chesapeake Bay. They lived in connection to the seasons and the natural resources of the region” (“Chesapeake Natives: Three Major Chiefdoms”). Prior to the arrival of the colonists, the Native Americans built and maintained successful communities in their ancestral homes for generations.

During the “Gilded Age” period of American history, development of the Trans-Mississippi west was crucial to fulfilling the American dream of manifest destiny and creating an identity which was distinctly American. Since the west is often associated with rugged pioneers and frontiersmen, there is an overarching idea of hardy American individualism. However, although these settlers were brave and helped to make America into what it is today, they heavily relied on federal support. It would not have been possible for white Americans to settle the Trans-Mississippi west without the US government removing Native Americans from their lands and placing them on reservations, offering land grants and incentives for people to move out west, and the