Essay On Cherokee Removal

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

Cherokee, Cheyenne, Seminoles Option #2 During the nineteenth-century, the federal Indian policy changed and it forced the removal or relocation of many different Indian tribes. The federal government sought to expand its control of territory and resources across America. The one big problem the U.S. faced were the Indians who resisted their removal. Georgia signed the Compact of 1802 which stated that if Georgia were to give up their western claims, the U.S. would eradicate American Indian land titles in Georgia and remove them (Lecture 14).

On July 17, 1830, the Cherokee nation published an appeal to all of the American people. United States government paid little thought to the Native Americans’ previous letters of their concerns. It came to the point where they turned to the everyday people to help them. They were desperate.

Introduction The Cherokee people have a rich history in North America. A strong people pre- and post-contact, they have experienced time of prosper, decline, and regrowth. This essay will provide an overview of the Cherokee people using their history transitioning into contemporary times. A focus will be on their political, social, cultural and economic impacts in both a historical and contemporary context. To conclude, I will discuss the impacts European’s had on the Cherokee people’s progression into the 21st century using Goehring’s (1993) model of colonial impacts.

The Act led to an array of legal and moral arguments for and against the need to relocate the Indians westward from the agriculturally productive lands of the Mississippi in Georgia and parts of Alabama. This paper compares and contrasts the major arguments for and against the

Dear Mr. Parker, During the 1838 Congress passed a law called the Indian Removal homes from Georgia to Indian Territory. It was a long walk 4,000 thousand of us died from the terrible weather,illness, weakness. After the devastating journey, the Cherokee Indians tried to settle in their new "desert" home. In the new territory, problems developed with the new arrivals, and Cherokees who had already come here.

With the arrival of Anglo-Americans, Native Americans lost much more than just their land. Tribes were forced onto reservations, stripped of their culture, wealth and place in society, with no hope of regaining what they owned unless by complete assimilation. For the latter half of the 19th and early 20th centuries, many Anglo-Americans continually pushed for Native Americans to abandon their cultures and “savage” ways. However, despite the many attempts to force Natives into Anglo-American culture, many Native Americans found ways to negotiate with the demands of the Anglo-Americans through mainly social, economic and legal means.

President Jackson did not treat any of the Indians fairly. President Jackson had the Indians move from where they lived to west of the Mississippi River. In President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress on December 6,1830, it stated that “Cherokee nation occupies its own territory and no Georgia citizens have the right to enter.” (Worcester) The Cherokee had their territory but it was taken away by Jackson.

Trail of Tears Native Americans experienced a dramatic change in the 1830s. Nearly 125,000 Native Americans who lived on inherited land from ancestors of Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Florida were all cast out by the end of the decade. The federal government forced the natives to leave because white settlers wanted an area to grow their cotton. Andrew Jackson (President of the U.S. during this time) signed into law, the Indian Removal Act, authorizing him to grant unsettled lands west of the Mississippi River in return for native lands within state borders.

The Indian Removal Act was signed in 1830 by President Andrew Jackson to remove the Cherokee Indians from their homes and force them to settle west of the Mississippi River. The act was passed in hopes to gain agrarian land that would replenish the cotton industry which had plummeted after the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson believed that effectively forcing the Cherokees to become more civilized and to christianize them would be beneficial to them. Therefore, he thought the journey westward was necessary. In late 1838, the Cherokees were removed from their homes and forced into a brutal journey westward in the bitter cold. The hardships of the sufferable journey can be observed by three separate accounts form a Cherokee woman, a Cherokee slave,

Many even died of starvation with lack of food on the long journey. This removal also split apart families and ruined close relationships among friends. Not only did the Indian Removal affect Indians physically, but it also developed mental issues with in the tribes that would last forever. These Indian’s tribes forever lived with the memories of their friends and family being killed and continued to remember all of the cruelty they were put through being forced off of their

Indian removal President andrew jackson signed a law on may 28, 1830. The law was called the Indian Removal. A few tribes went peacefully but some did not want to go and leave their home. In 1838-39 the cherokee were forcefully removed from their homes. 4,000 cherokee died on this trip which became known as “The trail of Tears”.

This unforgivable history has been brushed away and forgotten. The Cherokee lost all that they had known do the greed and corruption of the government. We must hear this story so that a crime of this magnitude will never be repeated against anyone

xIs it wrong to kick someone out of their own home when they didn’t do anything wrong? The Cherokee was in that same situation. The Cherokees’ situation was just like taking a cell phone ,which is dear to a human, away. They were kicked off their own land. They had done nothing too bad, but the Georgians wanted them to leave. The Supreme Court even allowed them to stay, but the new settlers still wanted them out. The Indian Removal isn’t justified and the Indians should have stayed in Georgia because it was their own land, staying would help their health, and only a few signed the treaty.

Thesis: The English were a prideful group, entangled in ethnocentrism, that caused a condescending and harsh treatment of the Native Americans, while the Native Americans were actually a dynamic and superior society, which led to the resentment and strife between the groups. P1: English view of Native Americans in VA Even though the English were subordinates of the Powhatan, they disrespected him and his chiefdom due to their preconceived beliefs that they were inferior. “Although the Country people are very barbarous, yet have they amongst them such government...that would be counted very civil… [by having] a Monarchical government” (Smith 22). John Smith acknowledges the “very civil” government of the Natives but still disrespected them by calling them “very barbarous,” which