More handpicked essays just for you.
President Jackson's rationale behind the indian removal act
Role of president Jackson on Indian removal
Role of president Jackson on Indian removal
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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’s Native American policies were very undemocratic because they decreased the power of the people. Document 9 states that the Native Americans have reasons to stay on their land, one being that the land west of the Arkansas Territory is unknown to them. Another is that the region is poorly supplied with food and water and that the new neighbors have different customs and a totally different language. Finally, they wish to remain on the land in which their ancestors died and where they were buried. The evidence helps explain that Andrew Jackson’s Native American policy was very undemocratic because the Native Americans had four very good reasons for staying on their homeland.
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
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?
Andrew Jackson was born in March 25, 1767. He grew up poor and his father died before he was born. His home was in Waxhaws, a place where there were battles between the Native Americans and the whites. His mother eventually moved into her brother-in-law’s house and work as a maid there. Jackson was known for being short-tempered and getting in trouble many times.
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
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
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.
The land was seen as a way to a greater nation because people believed God gave them the right. However, while they believed this and tried to make it happened, they had a conflict. Native American stood in their way and the only way to get what the people wanted the Natives needed to leave. This brings on the Indian Removal Act that occurred in 1830 leaded by Andrew Jackson. This can be seen in the article written by Jackson on the Removal Act on the lines, “It will place a dense and civilized population in large tracts of occupied by a few savage hunters.”
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.
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.
Could you imagine being moved from your home and march hundreds of miles at gunpoint! It sounds like a nightmare but it was a reality for many innocent people they were forced to move to a whole different place and try to survive. In 1820 the treaty of doak 's stand was one of the very first removal of native and land. Andrew jackson gave a talk /speech to the choctaw proposed land exchange for land in the mississippi for land in arkansas but the choctaw nation did not want to sign the treaty but jackson forced the natives to sign jackson was not yet president.
This source has significant value to historians but, like any other source, has its limitations. Andrew Jackson’s motivation to remove the Cherokee from their homeland originated from an avid persona to benefit the Americans. The speech analyzes Jackson’s motivation, and specific plans to remove the Cherokee. In consideration of the speech being written in 1830, the audience can learn how Jackson was rather harsh towards the natives in order to benefit himself and others. This is evident with Andrew Jackson’s actions and his presumptions of the Natives.
