The Pros And Cons Of The Trail Of Tears

277 Words2 Pages
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).
Rather than forced Native American to leave their land, The president Jackson and the congress could develop some activities to share the outcome of gold with them. They could find and arrangement which could result to leave them on their land and share the outcomes of the exploitations of the gold and others natural resources.
…show more content…
However, president Jackson made it unpeaceful. Native Americans could migrate or stay under some conditions which later were not respected by the president. According to www.pbs.org, <>. In addition, many Native Americans lost their lives from the Trail of Tears.
The trail of Tears was an unethical decision implemented by the government of the United State. The President Jackson used force to push the native American out of their lands. According to www.ushistory.gov, << Over 20,000 Cherokees were forced to march westward along the Trail of Tears. About a quarter of them died along the way>>. It was a violation of human rights that could be avoided with less selfish from the President Jackson and the
Open Document