In the article by Anthony F. C. Wallace, “The Hunger for Indian Land in Andrew Jackson’s America,” the reasons for America's need for Indian land is discussed. The purpose of this article is to explain the Indian removal that occurred under Andrew Jackson’s presidency. The thesis of this essay states that Americans kicked the Natives off of their land to fulfill a selfish desire to expand the cotton industry. The first point Wallace uses to support his thesis is how Jackson’s financial interest in the land affected the removal of Natives.
The degree of success in any situation depends on the point of view, especially in history. In American history, the start of the Civil War tested the nation 's bond of unity but changed with the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. The executive order drafted by President Abraham Lincoln was both a political and military tactic. Its purpose was to "free" slaves in Confederate lands, meaning the only way slaves could escape was to disobey their masters and flee to the North and join their army as protection. The period between 1865 - 1877 known as reconstruction, an effort to bring peace to North and the South and reunite the nation.
In 1830 Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, this would start the treaty negotiations with Native Americans. Although, this was really and act forced Native Americans to move and give up their lands that were east of the Mississippi for land in the West. “...state and federal governments pressured the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, and Cherokee nations to sign treaties and surrender land” (yawp). When the Cherokee nation tried to defend their land, they sued the state of Georgia for the protection of their lands. They even went to the Supreme Court after Georgia revoked legal state agreements that they had with the Cherokee’s, that had guaranteed rights of movement and jurisdiction of tribal law.
This paper critically examines the Emancipation Proclamation and contemplates its effect through the cases of Plessey v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education and questions whether President Lincoln’s motive of issuing the Emancipation Proclamation was a pure moral objection to slavery. Although the Proclamation is and forever will be a progressive and positive development in American history given the abolition of slavery; I believe that the intention of issuing it was to do more with the defeating the rising Southern military rather than ending slavery due to moral reasons as hugely believed. After the Southern states ultimately withdrew from the Union, he made it clear that the United States Army was fighting to put the Union back together. President Lincoln restated this motivation in the Proclamation itself, describing it as "a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing the rebellion (of the Southern states). " The goal was to force the South to return to the Union, as they were being stripped of their labor force without which survival would become difficult for the Southerners.
The author also made it known that many plantation owners were accepting positions to claim that "to the Negroes, slavery seemed natural; knowing no other life, they accepted it without giving the matter much thought” (429). Which seems odd because blacks were transported to America and sold to the highest bidder. Their lifestyle prior did not resemble what they had endured in America. When arriving to America they had the impression they were here to help the white man not be inferior to
George Washington Carver was born into a world where African Americas were not treated equal. He was born during the Lincoln administration, where President Lincoln was working to have a united United States of America. The Southern part of the United States were supportive of having black slaves to work on their farms and plantations. The Northern part of the United States, however, did not support the use of slaves to perform work. This caused a huge conflict within the country and started the Civil War.
Two ways a man can be enslaved are by force and by manipulation, to make one think that good will come out of doing what the master’s demands. Religion was used to control the minds of the slaves by manipulating slaves to be obedient and appreciative of their masters. What white slave owners did was almost similar to the Catholic clergy’s actions before the Reformation. They didn’t allow slaves to go to church themselves because they feared rebellion and slave owners would preach the “gospel” or hire someone.
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).
The election separated the nation in half and also urged 7 states including South Carolina seceded from United States. From then on, the pro-slavery and anti-slavery were officially against each other, which soon gave rise to the Civil War. In conclusion, the issue of slavery precipitated the Civil War. Uncle Tom’s Cabin gave a strong social effect on opposing slavery, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was the prelude of the Civil War, and the Election of 1860 splitted the nation into two sides, which directly led to the War.
The Civil War was the war that tore the united states apart. Most people assume the war was fought only about slavery. But the war was fought for many more reasons. The north, known as the Yankees, or the union. Wanted to abolish slavery, decreases the economy difference in the southern farms and better state and equal rights.
Due to the Missouri Compromise, new states in the North were automatically free states. The Northerns started to hate slavery and wanted to push other states to become free states. The South could not let this happen because their economy depending on slavery. Since the slave masters did not have to pay their workers, everything they sold was 100% profit to the South. If slavery was abolished, they’d have to find other ways to farm their plantations and would undoubtedly make less money.
Though Texas had desired to be admitted as a slave state, Southern politicians, such as John L. O’Sullivan, lobbied for the region to enter the union as that meant renewed security to the planting interest against the increasing wealth and population of the North as well as power over the federal government in the legality of slavery (Document 3). Northern leaders were equally convinced that the Southern prophecy was true and aimed to prevent this annexation by voting in opposition to it during the congressional vote. However, as shown within the map of congressional votes, it was ultimately annexed due to the overwhelming majority of votes in favor of this acquisition of land for the union (Document 6). Just as this drive towards expansion spread, there appeared a new species of anti-slavery doctrine – the
In 1830 newly elected President Jackson instituted the Indian Removal Act which gave the United States government the ability to negotiate with the Native American tribes of the south and relocate them to lands west of the Mississippi. When implementing the Indian Removal Act Jackson attempted to justify it by saying that he was trying to protect the Native American Tribes from becoming extinct as their brother in the Northern states had become . Jackson would develop a Native American reservation in present day Oklahoma where all Native Americans living east of the Mississippi River would move to with the passing of the Indian Removal Act. The lands that the Native Americans had been living on were continually being claimed by Americans looking to expand their own land in the farming focused southern states. The expansion of slavery and the growth of the southern cotton industry made the Native American lands more and more appealing to Americans that were living around these tribal lands . These Native Americans would have to suffer the travel from the lands of their fathers to Oklahoma, where the federal government had set aside lands for these tribes to begin to rebuild their way of life.
This led to the Indian Removal Act and what the Cherokee call Trail of Tears. Over several years, Jackson seized millions of acres of Indian Lands making room for cotton plantations. The Removal Act signed in 1830, by President Jackson, was to guarantee the Indians would have land in the west but these promises were later broken. The Removal Act was