Indian Removal Dbq

455 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Native american perspective of native american removal act

"What good man would prefer a country covered with forest and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive republic, studded with cities, towns and prosperous farms and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization and religion?" Sounds reasonable right? Well, that's what Andrew Jackson thought too when referring to the Native Americans. President Jackson had thought these human beings were savages he spread that opinion to others in congress and the supreme court. Probably one of the many reasons that the Indian Removal Act was passed. Which then lead to the Trail of Tears. Those poor Native Americans were the focus point of something standing in the way of America's Manifest Destiny. At least in Andrew Jacksons eyes, they were. The Indian Removal Act was a bill passed in the 1800’s. Its purpose was to forcefully remove the Native Americans from their homeland. Indians from Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, and Alabama, were moved from the place where they had grown up. Where their ancestors had grown up. Once the Native Americans were gone the territory would be claimed by the US. They were moved to the west had suffered many endearments from the move. …show more content…

Once the Native Americans were removed from their homes they were set on the Trail of Tears. Which happens to be a very fitting name for the moods of those poor people. Conditions were bad for most. Many Native Americans had died from pneumonia because of the harsh temperatures. Many tribes had ended up in Oregon while others in colder places. The Indians were used to nice weather and easy lands to work. So while they were already far away from home, they had to accommodate to the scenery. All of these terrible things had been caused by one thing

Show More
Related

  • Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal 1980 DBQ

    1271 Words  | 3 Pages

    Under the Jackson Administration, the changes made shaped national Indian policy. Morally, Andrew Jackson dismissed prior ideas that natives would gradually assimilate into white culture, and believed that removing Indians from their homes was the best answer for both the natives and Americans. Politically, before Jackson treaties were in place that protected natives until he changed those policies, and broke those treaties, violating the United States Constitution. Under Jackson’s changes, the United States effectively gained an enormous amount of land. The removal of the Indians west of the Mississippi River in the 1830’s changed the national policy in place when Jackson became President as evidenced by the moral, political, constitutional, and practical concerns of the National Indian Policy.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Andrew Jackson

    820 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress in order to allow the growth of the United States to continue without the interference of the Native Americans. Jackson believed that the Native Americans were inferior to white settlers and wanted to force them west of the Mississippi. He believed that the United States would not expand past that boundary, so the Native Americans could govern themselves. Jackson evicted thousands of Native Americans from their homes in Georgia and the Carolinas and even disregarded the Supreme Court’s authority and initiated his plan of forcing the Natives’ on the trail of tears. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Indians, however Jackson ignored the ruling and continued with his plan. The result of the Indian Removal Act was that many tribes were tricked or forced off their lands, if they refused to go willingly, resulting in many deaths from skirmishes with soldiers as well as from starvation and disease. The Cherokee in particular were forced to undergo a forced march that became known as the Trail of

    Read More

  • DBQ on Jackson and the Indian Removal

    1646 Words  | 4 Pages

    The generalization that, “The decision of the Jackson administration to remove the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River in the 1830s was more a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790s than a change in that policy,” is valid. Ever since the American people arrived at the New World they have continually driven the Native Americans out of their native lands. Many people wanted to contribute to this removal of the Cherokees and their society. Knox proposed a “civilization” of the Indians. President Monroe continued Knox’s plan by developing ways to rid of the Indians, claiming it would be beneficial to all. Andrew Jackson ultimately fulfilled the plan.     First of all, the map [Document A] indicates the relationship between time, land, and policies, which affected the Indians. The Indian Tribes have been forced to give up their land as early as the 1720s. Between the years of 1721 and 1785, the Colonial and Confederation treaties forced the Indians to give up huge portions of their land. During Washington's, Monroe's, and Jefferson's administration, more and more Indian land was being commandeered by the colonists. The Washington administration signed the Treaty of Holston and other supplements between the time periods of 1791 until 1798 that made the Native Americans give up more of their homeland land. The administrations during the 1790's to the 1830's had gradually acquired more and more land from the Cherokee Indians. Jackson followed that precedent by the acquisition of more Cherokee lands.     In later years, those speaking on behalf of the United States government believed that teaching the Indians how to live a more civilized life would only benefit them. Rather than only thinking of benefiting the Indians, we were also trying to benefit ourselves. We were looking to acquire the Indians’ land. In a letter to George Washington, Knox says we should first is to destroy the Indians with an army, and the second is to make peace with them.      The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 began to put Knox’s plan into effect. The federal government’s promise of supplying the Indians with animals, agricultural tool...

    Read More

  • Dbq Indian Removal Act

    1284 Words  | 3 Pages

    Back in 1830, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act. This act required the government to negotiate treaties that would require the Native Americans to move to the west from their homelands. Native Americans would be moved to an area called the Indian Territory, which is Oklahoma and parts of Kansas and Nebraska. Some tribes that were to be moved are Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, Choctaw, and Chickasaw. All of the other tribes had relocated in the fall of 1831 to the Indian Territory besides the Cherokee who did not relocate until the fall of 1838.

    Read More

  • The Reasons Why Andrew Jackson Was Democratic?

    1497 Words  | 3 Pages

    One reason why Andrew Jackson was not democratic was because of his mistreatment of the Native American. Today, the population of Native Americans are significantly less than when Jackson served as the leader of the free world. From the early 1830’s until 1840, Jackson forced 5 separate Indian tribes onto a small piece of land (Doc L). A likely reason for this sudden move

    Read More

  • Cruel and Inhuman Treatment of Native Americans by the Colonists

    1498 Words  | 3 Pages

    Unfortunately, this great relationship that was built between the natives and the colonists of mutual respect and gain was coming to a screeching halt. In the start of the 1830s, the United States government began to realize it’s newfound strength and stability. It was decided that the nation had new and growing needs and aspirations, one of these being the idea of “Manifest Destiny”. Its continuous growth in population began to require much more resources and ultimately, land. The government started off as simply bargaining and persuading the Indian tribes to push west from their homeland. The Indians began to disagree and peacefully object and fight back. The United States government then felt they had no other option but to use force. In Indian Removal Act was signed by Andrew Jackson on May 18, 1830. This ultimately resulted in the relocation of the Eastern tribes out west, even as far as to the edge of the Great Plains. A copy of this act is laid out for you in the book, Th...

    Read More

  • Native American Perspective on Indian Removal Act

    800 Words  | 2 Pages

    The removal of the Native Americans was an egocentric move on Jackson’s part. Jackson was only able to see how our removal would benefit the government but was not concerned at all about our values and culture. “It puts an end to all possible danger of collision between the authorities of the general and state governments on account of the Indians” (91). This statement, included in the State of the Union Address, exhibits how Jackson was quick to place blame on the Indians. He was basically saying that if there were any disputes between the general and state governments, it would be because of the Indian’s choice to not leave the land. Jackson was attempting to hold the Indians accountable for a matter that they had no say in. It is evident that Jackson could have are less about the Indian’s home land, where we were birthed and raised our kids. 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. “What good m...

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Policy of 1830

    804 Words  | 2 Pages

    Andrew Jackson's motives for enforcing the policy, and the actions he performed when he carried it out, can be interpreted in various ways depending on the analyzer's perspective. Robert V. Remini, for one, believes that Andrew Jackson forced the Indians out of their lands solely for humanitarian reasons. He states, "[Andrew Jackson] felt he had followed the 'dictates of humanity' and saved the Indians from certain death." Andrew Jackson himself stated, in Document Q, "It is better for [the natives] to treat and move," because, "the arm of the government is not sufficiently strong to preserve them from destruction." Robert V. Remini also states, "The actual removal of the Choctaw Nation violated every principle for which Jackson stood," and "Jackson tried to prevent this calamity but he was too far away to exercise any real control. "On the other hand, Anthony F. C. Wallace insists that Jackson intentionally "oversaw a harsh policy with regard to the Native Americans." In addition, Anthony F. C. Wallace believes, "It was the team of Jackson, Cass, and Herring that supervised the removal of most of the Southern Indians."

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson Essay

    751 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Indian removal was so important to Jackson that he went back to Tennessee to have the first negotiations in person. He gave the Indians a couple simple alternatives. Alternatives like to submit to state authority, or migrate beyond the Mississippi. Jackson Offered generous aid on one hand and while holding the threat of subjugation in the other. The Chickasaws and Choctaws submitted quickly. The only tribe that resisted until the end was the Cherokees. President Jackson’s presidency was tarnished by the way the U.S. government handled the Native Americans. Although financially, and economically Jackson truly was a good leader, some people view him in a negative way because of the “Indian Removal Act.”

    Read More

  • Displacement and Mistreatment of Native Americans

    2250 Words  | 5 Pages

    The removal of Indian tribes was one of the tragic times in America’s history. Native Americans endured hard times when immigrants came to the New World. Their land was stolen, people were treated poorly, tricked, harassed, bullied, and much more. The mistreatment was caused mostly by the white settlers, who wanted the Indians land. The Indians removal was pushed to benefit the settlers, which in turn, caused the Indians to be treated as less than a person and pushed off of their lands. MOREEE

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson

    713 Words  | 2 Pages

    President Jackson singlehandedly led the destruction of the Native Americans with his aggressive actions and hostile decisions. President Jackson shirked his responsibility to protect the Native Americans of the United States by ignoring the Supreme Court’s decision, promoting legislation to bring about the separation of Native Americans and whites, and his decision to involve the United States Armed Forces against Indian Tribes. If it was not for President Jackson’s actions, the future of the Native Americans would have been different, or at least the American settlers wanted Indian land for many reasons. These reasons include geography and terrain, location, resources, and old grudges. First, the geography was perfect for farmers with fertile land.

    Read More

  • Indian Removal Dbq

    400 Words  | 1 Pages

    In the nineteenth century, the U.S. government wanted to expand their territories to the West in order to trade with more countries through the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the government forced to remove five Tribes of Indians from the South toward the West. The act was known as Indian Removal in 1830, which was the policy that moving Indians to the West. Simultaneously, numerous Americans believed in the belief of manifest destiny, so many Americans rushed into the West for seeking lands. However, the demand of lands of the West was consistently, so the U.S. government evolved Indian Removal to settle the Indians in 1851- reservations which was the government reserved new lands for Indians to stay on and pay them back money every year. However

    Read More

  • Indian Removal Dbq

    989 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1814, he became a national hero by killing eight hundred Indians at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend. When the Indians like the Cherokee fought back or rebelled in ways that are insignificant in comparison to the Revolutionary War, whole villages were destroyed (page 130). Much like Southern Paternalism, wherein supporters of slavery justified it by claiming slavery benefited everyone involved, Andrew Jackson claimed, “We bleed our enemies in such eases to give them their senses.” (Page 127) This was Jackson’s response after signing the treaty of the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, which took away half the land of the Creek nation and was, "the largest single Indian cession of southern American land. It took land from Creeks who had fought with Jackson as well as those who had fought against him.” (Page 129) His justification was that they were bettering the Indians, allowing them easier lifestyles because they were introducing them to modern civilization. What I don’t understand is how come groups like the American Antislavery Society that we learned about in Chapter 15, did not fight for the rights of the Indians. Their arguments included that it was inhumane to enslave others; when did it become humane to punish others to fight for their land and

    Read More

  • Indian Removal Dbq

    594 Words  | 2 Pages

    Imagine waking up one day only to find that you cannot live there anymore. You are being required to move because the government wishes to isolate your race, or religion, in a certain zone. You would probably not be very happy at all, but this exact instance is what happened to the Native Americans. In 1830, President Andrew Jackson passed the Indian Removal Act. This law made it so that all Native Americans must relocate their entire tribes to what is now known as Oklahoma. Some tribes moved with no debate, but some put up a fight, for the land was rightfully theirs. Some scholars believe the forced migration of the Native Americans was justified due to the colonists belief in Manifest Destiny (the desire to expand westward). Although American settlers wish to pursue their country’s destiny, the historic actions taken are not the way to go about it. The Colonists should have never taken the

    Read More

  • Indian Removal Dbq

    2497 Words  | 5 Pages

    When I was really young I always had the same opinion as my father about most things, even if I didn’t know anything about it. I didn’t know much back then so I just followed everything he said and never questioned it because I thought that he was probably right. Then I grew older and matured and realized that I didn’t agree with him about a lot of things. The way that I used to blindly follow whatever my dad thinks is like the Chinese proverb “A wise man makes his own decisions an ignorant man follows the public opinion.” The proverb means that people who just blindly follow the opinion of someone else instead of thinking for themselves are ignorant. The proverb is also saying that people that would rather just go with anything that

    Read More

More about Indian Removal Dbq

Open Document