March 15, 1767 is Andrew Jacksons date of birth in South Carolina. His mother and two brother were killed during the British invasion of the Carolinas which left him with hate toward Great Britain. Andrew Jackson ended up married to Rachel Robards. Jackson was elected quickly to the U.S. Senate however, he quit a year later and was elected Tennessee's judge of the superior court. Later he was picked to be the run the state militia.
Jackson faced the issue of Indian removal throughout his eight year in office. He made about 70 treaties with Native American tribes both in South and the Northwest. Jackson presidency marked as a new era in Indian-Anglo American relations imitating a policy if Indian removal. His annual message of December of 1829 contained extensive remarks on the present and future state of American Indians in the United States. It contained many observations, assessments, and prejudices about Native Americans that had been widely held by Native American hunters makers since Thomas Jefferson’s presidency.
In Andrew Jackson’s message “On Indian Removal,” he used diction to create an uplifting tone. For example, in his first line he chose those words, “It gives me pleasure to announce to congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation.” In addition, he said,”It will separate the Indians from immediate contact with settlements of whites; free them from the power of the States; enable them to pursue happiness in their own way and under their own rude institutions; will retard the progress of decay, which is lessening their numbers, and perhaps cause them gradually, under the protection of the Government and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community.” Lastly, he wrote, “To save him from this alternative, or perhaps utter annihilation, the General Government kindly offers him a new home, and proposes to pay the whole expense of his removal and settlement.” Jackson chose his words such as: “it gives
Jackson was a democratic republican who was voted into office in 1828. During the election against john quincy adams , he appealed to the people through the common man. Because he was born in North Carolina , he presented many ideas that would benefit the common man. He also used the spoil system in order to gain supporters. The spoil system enabled people to get a position in government as long as they voted for him.
[...] However, [it] forced Native Americans to vacate lands they had lived on for generations”(Doc 5 Par 3). This fact even further supports the idea that Andrew Jackson was not a man of morals even for his time. Although Jackson’s intentions were “good” in terms of manifest destiny, The Indian Removal
With more thought and time Andrew Jackson could have come up with a way to integrate natives into society, without removing them entirely. It seems as though America gave up on a people willing to sacrifice their heritage and forget their culture to be a part of this country, and that in itself is a monumental
Bridgette Adesuwa Omon Olumhense DBQ #2 The time period between 1789 and the mid 1830’s was quite ambiguous. With the British gone and the United States now in her building stages, an attiude needed to be taken towards the Native Americans, specifically the Cherokee Indians. The administrations before Jackson treated the Cherokee Indians with a somewhat docile, amiable hand, however much was left to be desired on the side of the United States. Many did not want to share the newly freed land with those that were not their own. Underneath the façade of friendship was manipulation, guarded ethnocentrism and racism.
The Indian Removal Act was a deal, which made the president, Andrew Jackson, of The Unites States authorised to resettle the Indian tribes who lived in the eastern parts of Mississippi. The deal was signed in 1829 and took effect in 1830. The main reason for why Jackson signed the deal was plain and simple. The American soldiers found huge amounts of gold in the areas of the Natives, and they wanted the Natives removed so that they could dig and search for more. A few of the tribes decided to leave peacefully, while others tried to resist Andrews unfair policy.
During Andrew Jackson’s presidency, he faced tremendous conflict with the Indians. As the United States began to expand, more and more issues began arising between the Americans and their Indian neighbors. Jackson had to decide whether or not to move the Indians out of Georgia and into a section of land in the west that he had specifically set aside for that purpose. Knowing the impact his decision would carry, he weighed the options before coming to a conclusion. Ultimately, he chose to move the Indians west.
Andrew Jackson’s policy of Indian Removal was not justified because the Indians had rights to own the lands and the U.S. did not follow their democratic ways towards the natives. One example from the text is, “the state of Georgia, in her attempt to extend her laws over us…in direction opposition to the treaties” (The Cherokees Appeal to Congress). Based on this information, I realized the U.S. government was disobeying the “supreme law of the land” or treaties, as of John Marshall (Chief Justice of Supreme Court) had stated and was no different on how Britain had unfairly treated the Americans before. Also, the text supports this idea by stating “This is the land of our nativity, and the land of our...birth. We cannot consent to abandon
He thought they were animals and that Native Americans were in the way of advancement ("Andrew Jackson Speaks: Indian Removal Policy). He forced 5 tribes of Native Americans to move which was called the Trail Tears. By 1842 almost all of the Native American where across the Mississippi River. Andrew Jackson wanted the growth of the American people and he needed more room, as the population grew. He wanted the growth of the people and the advancement in technology and the Native Americans did not, they wanted it to stay the way it was but America grew large enough to support our country today.
He believed Jackson needed a reality check. The Indians were there first, it was their land. He force the Natives to move away from their homeland, with brute force. He believes Jackson could not justify his actions just because it was for America’s benefit. He also stated Jackson refused to listen to many people, and he refused to let Indians live.
No living human is either entirely virtuous or wholeheartedly evil. Sometimes it can seem that way, but that’s because most of the time individuals hear want to hear what they want to hear. This concept is entirely true in regard to Andrew Jackson, who people can see as a heroic American war hero who came from nothing and stood by his beliefs or the complete opposite. People could also perceive him as an evil, tyrannical leader who forced thousands of Native Americans out of their homes. I believe Andrew Jackson was not a hero but a villain because of the way he treated Native Americans, the actions he took during his presidency, and the fact he was a slave-owner.
Although Jackson was important, he was part of many terrible things. Around the 1820s there were many major indian tribes in eastern United States such as Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek and Seminole. This soon came to a change. Andrew Jackson thought these Indians were in the way of eastern development, using the Indian Removal Act which the congress had approved he decided to kick them out and send them west. In 1831 the Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Indians had the right to self government and the United States could not interfere with that.
In my essay I will be answering questions and talking Historical events that happen in Andrew Jackson Speech to Congress on Indian Removal. I will also be talking about the story in a historical viewpoint. I will be answering only 2 questions. How does the text fit into historical movements? What are the fundamental historical events of the period in which the author wrote?
