indian removal essay

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

• How did Andrew Jackson become well-known in the United States?
• What were Andrew Jackson’s accomplishments?

Indian Removal Act

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Khan Academy - Indian Removal
• Spartacus Educational - Indian Removal Act
• Encyclopedia of Arkansas - Indian Removal
• Library of Congress - Indian Removal Act
• The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History - Indian Removal
• HistoryNet - Indian Removal Act
• Indian Removal Act - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)

Indian Removal Act , (May 28, 1830), first major legislative departure from the U.S. policy of officially respecting the legal and political rights of the American Indians . The act authorized the president to grant Indian tribes unsettled western prairie land in exchange for their desirable territories within state borders (especially in the Southeast), from which the tribes would be removed. The rapid settlement of land east of the Mississippi River made it clear by the mid-1820s that the white man would not tolerate the presence of even peaceful Indians there. Pres. Andrew Jackson (1829–37) vigorously promoted this new policy, which became incorporated in the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Although the bill provided only for the negotiation with tribes east of the Mississippi on the basis of payment for their lands, trouble arose when the United States resorted to force to gain the Indians’ compliance with its demand that they accept the land exchange and move west.

A number of northern tribes were peacefully resettled in western lands considered undesirable for the white man. The problem lay in the Southeast, where members of what were known as the Five Civilized Tribes ( Chickasaw , Choctaw , Seminole , Cherokee , and Creek ) refused to trade their cultivated farms for the promise of strange land in the Indian Territory with a so-called permanent title to that land. Many of these Indians had homes, representative government, children in missionary schools, and trades other than farming. Some 100,000 tribesmen were forced to march westward under U.S. military coercion in the 1830s; up to 25 percent of the Indians, many in manacles, perished en route. The trek of the Cherokee in 1838–39 became known as the infamous “ Trail of Tears .” Even more reluctant to leave their native lands were the Florida Indians, who fought resettlement for seven years (1835–42) in the second of the Seminole Wars .

The frontier began to be pushed aggressively westward in the years that followed, upsetting the “guaranteed” titles of the displaced tribes and further reducing their relocated holdings.

lesson information

Cherokee, Eastern Band of Cherokee, Kickapoo, Muscogee, Potawatomi, Seminole, Shawnee

U.S. History, Civics, Geography

Removal, Indian Removal, American Indian Removal, Osceola, Andrew Jackson, Treaties, treaty, Trail of Tears, John Ross, Menominee, Catahecassa, Black Hoof

East, Midwest, Southeast

essential understandings

Interactions with Europeans and Americans brought accelerated and often devastating changes to American Indian cultures.

American Indian history is not singular or timeless. American Indian cultures have always adapted and changed in response to environmental, economic, social, and other factors. American Indian cultures and people are fully engaged in the modern world.

Hearing and understanding American Indian history from Indian perspectives provides an important point of view to the discussions of history and cultures in the Americas. Indian perspectives expand the social, political, and economic dialogue.

Throughout their histories, Native groups have relocated and successfully adapted to new places and environments.

External educational, governmental, and religious institutions have exerted major influences on American Indian individuals, groups, and institutions. Native people have fought to counter these pressures and have adapted to them when necessary. Many Native institutions today are mixtures of Native and Western constructs, reflecting external influence and Native adaptation.

A variety of political, economic, legal, military, and social policies were used by Europeans and Americans to remove and relocate American Indians and to destroy their cultures. U.S. policies regarding American Indians were the result of major national debate. Many of these policies had a devastating effect on established American Indian governing principles and systems. Other policies sought to strengthen and restore tribal self-government.

A variety of historical policy periods have had a major impact on American Indian peoples' abilities to self-govern.

academic standards

George Catlin, Os-ce-o-lá , 1838. Smithsonian American Art Museum, 1985.66.301. Thomas Sully, Andrew Jackson, 1845. Courtesy National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1942.8.34.

Indian Removal Act of 1830.

President Andrew Jackson to Congress, On Indian Removal , December 6, 1830. National Archives, Washington, D.C., Record Group 46.

Intrusions of land-hungry settlers, treaties with the U.S., and the Indian Removal Act (1830) resulted in the forced removal and migration of many eastern Indian nations to lands west of the Mississippi.

Native Nations Removed West, 1817–58. Map by Gene Thorp/Cartographic Concepts, Inc. © Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of the American Indian.

hear from the historian:

American Indian Removal

President Thomas Jefferson was one of the first advocates for Indian removal. The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 gave the United States the opportunity to explore and buy vast lands west of the Mississippi River from American Indian Nations that owned them. President Jefferson then hoped to persuade the eastern Indian Nations to sign treaties and exchange their lands for territory west of the Mississippi.

Land-hungry Americans saw economic opportunity in American Indian lands, and the pressure to remove Indians grew. Americans tried to justify their actions by saying that Indians were uncivilized people who made little use of their vast tribal lands. They believed that the United States somehow had a "manifest destiny" to occupy the entire continent from coast to coast. Most American Indian Nations flatly rejected the idea of removal, and they tried every strategy they could imagine to avoid it.

Indians were not alone in opposing removal. The country was deeply divided about the idea. Thousands of citizens signed petitions against it. Newspaper articles depicted removal as a threat to the American value of justice. Some lawmakers denounced removal as an immoral violation of the government's previous treaty promises to Indian Nations. Even Chief Justice John Marshall wrote an opinion in an 1832 legal case, Worcester v. Georgia , finding that the state of Georgia had violated the Cherokee Nation's rights to self-government.

Eventually, the pro-removal forces won, and in 1830 Congress passed the Indian Removal Act by a slim margin. The legislation granted the president authority to negotiate Indian removal treaties, and American Indian removal was now an official U.S. policy.

American Indians continued the fight to keep their lands. But from about 1830 to 1850, the U.S. government used treaties, fraud, intimidation, and violence to remove about 100,000 American Indians west of the Mississippi. Thousands of Native men, women, and children died on the difficult trek to a strange new land that became known as Indian Territory (modern-day Oklahoma).

The tragedy and darkness of American Indian removal should not hide the remarkable story that followed. After resettling in Indian Territory, Native Peoples rebuilt their lives and cultures, and continued their struggle for self-government under their own laws on their new lands in the West.

But that is another story. For now, we hope this lesson shines a spotlight on the ways Native Peoples faced the crisis of removal. Their thoughts and actions reveal much about human strength in the face of adversity—a universal issue that is as relevant today as it was in the 1800s.

Kevin Gover (Pawnee). Director, NMAI

Project Manager, Lead Writer and Developer

Edwin Schupman (Muscogee), NMAI

Additional Writers/Lesson Developers

Colleen Call Smith, NMAI

Andy Paparella, Kenmore Middle School, Arlington, VA

Tammy Elser (Ed.D.), Insight Educational Services, Inc.

Stacey Mann

Renee Gokey (Shawnee), NMAI

Paraphrasing

Leslie O'Flahavan, E-Write

Researchers

Mark Hirsch (Ph.D), NMAI

Erin Beasley, NMAI

Maia Truesdale-Scott, NMAI

Suzanne Davis, NMAI

Lindy Trolan, NMAI

Clare Cuddy, NMAI

Daniel Fischer, NMAI

Michelle Nelin-Maruani, NMAI Teacher-in-Residence (Rapid City, SD)

Christopher Robinson, NMAI Teacher-in-Residence (Eastern Kentucky University)

Vilma Ortiz-Sanchez, NMAI

Johanna Gorelick, NMAI

Alexandra Harris, NMAI

Kathy Swan (Ph.D.), University of Kentucky

Justin Giles, Muscogee (Creek) Nation

Interviews and voice talent

7th Grade Students of Kenmore Middle School, Arlington, VA

Dan Davis, NMAI

Doug McMains, NMAI

Gussie Lehman, NMAI

Mark Christal, NMAI

Cheryl Wilson, NMAI

Laurie Swindull, NMAI

Deanna Wood, NMAI

David Chang, Informated Software Solutions

Interactivity Design

Informated Software Solutions

Interface Media Group

C&G Partners

Gene Thorp, Cartographic Concepts

Faith Marchevecchio

Martha Davidson

Anne Litchfield

Rights and Permissions

Wendy Hurlock-Baker, NMAI

Brett Finlayson

Robert Alexander (Comanche), NMAI

Contracts management

Pam Woodis (Apache), NMAI

Special thanks to:

The Trail of Tears: A Story of Cherokee Removal is organized in partnership with the Cherokee Nation. The case study and its related programming are generously supported by the Cherokee Nation and Cherokee Nation Businesses.

Mvto (thank you) to George Tiger, Principal Chief (former), Justin Giles, and other members of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma for their support and participation in this project.

We deeply appreciate the numerous educators who participated in formative testing of this product in Oklahoma, Montana, Kentucky, New York, Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

• American Indian Removal Introduction
• Removal: Does It Make Sense?
• Muscogee Nation's Experience with Removal
• Cherokee Nation's Resistance with Removal
• Six Native Nations Try to Avoid Removal
• Reflecting on Removal
• What Does "Removal" Look Like Today?
• Related Resources

• Study Notes
• College Essays

AP U.S. History Notes

• Chapter Outlines
• Practice Tests
• Topic Outlines
• Court Cases
• Sample Essays
• Indian Removal

Native Americans and the New Republic

From the time the first colonies were settled in America, relations between the Native American Indians and white settlers ranged from respected friends to hated enemies. Into the 1800s, Americans who were still in competition with the Indians for land and resources considered them to be uncivilized and barbaric. But many Americans admired the Indians and valued their contributions to American history and culture. These people hoped that with time the Indians could be peaceably assimilated into American society. Even before the Revolution, churches and religious organizations sent missionaries among the Indians to try to convert them to Christianity. In 1787, the Society for Propagating the Gospel among Indians was founded for that purpose. The federal government joined the effort to “civilize” Native Americans that had first been undertaken by the colonies and the churches. In 1793, Congress designated $20,000, a substantial sum for the time, to provide literacy, farming, and vocational assistance to Native Americans.

The United States recognized Indian tribes as separate nations of people entitled to their own lands that could only be obtained from them through treaties. Due to inexorable pressures of expansion, settlement, and commerce, however, treaties made with good intentions where often perceived as unsustainable within just a few years. The Indians felt betrayed and frequently reacted with violence when land promised to them forever was taken away. For the most part, however, they directed their energies toward maintaining their tribal identity while living in the new order.

By 1830, most of the territories east of the Mississippi River had become states. The Democratic Party, led by President Andrew Jackson, was committed to economic progress in the states and to settlement and development of the western frontier. These goals put the government in conflict with the more than 125,000 Native Americans who still lived east of the Mississippi. By this time, many Indians had given up nomadic hunting and had adopted a more settled way of life. In particular, the Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, and Seminoles tried to live in harmony with their white neighbors who called them the Five Civilized Tribes. The real conflict between the government and the Indians was the land held by the Indians through legal treaties. White pioneers, frustrated by the lack of opportunity in the settled areas, pushed hard for new lands to purchase and farm, while states containing Indian territories resented the existence of lands within their borders over which they had no authority and from which they collected no revenue.

The Treaty of 1791 recognized the Cherokees’ right to a substantial portion of northeastern Georgia. The Cherokees were very successful at adapting to a new way of life, farming the land, raising cattle, growing cotton, and even owning slaves to work their plantations. Missionaries established schools and helped the Cherokees in their new lives. One Cherokee, Sequoyah, devised the Cherokee syllabic alphabet of 85 characters so that his people could write down and preserve their thoughts. With a written language, the Cherokee were able to publish their own newspaper, The Cherokee Phoenix .

The Cherokees established their own governing body called the Cherokee National Council. In 1808, the Cherokee National Council developed a legal system, and in 1827 wrote a constitution enacting a system of tribal government to regulate affairs within the borders of their lands. Their government included an electoral system and a legislative, judicial, and executive branch. One tenet of the constitution was that on their own lands the Cherokee were not subject to the laws of Georgia. Treaties with the U.S. government recognized the Cherokee Nation, but the State of Georgia objected to having an independent Indian nation within its boundaries. Believing that the laws of Georgia should be sovereign throughout their state, Georgians passed legislation claiming jurisdiction over the Cherokee Nation in 1828.

These political actions coincided with increasing economic pressures to open this area to white settlement and development. The Cherokee land was coveted for agricultural production at a time when the population of the state was increasing and demand for farmland was high. In addition, gold was discovered in the region and many whites were eager to mine it.

The Indian Removal Act

In the face of mounting opposition to federal protection for autonomous Indian nations in Georgia and other states—opposition that threatened to become violent—President Jackson decided to move the Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River. He felt this offered the best hope to preserve peace and protect the Indians from being scattered and destroyed. Opening new land to white settlement would also increase economic progress. Jackson insisted that the Indians receive a fair price for their lands and that the government pay all expenses of resettlement.

In 1830 at the request of Jackson, a bill went before Congress authorizing moving the Indians across the Mississippi. Daniel Webster and Henry Clay opposed the Indian Removal Bill, but its most bitterly outspoken opponent was Davy Crockett. Having served in the army under Jackson, Crockett was a Jacksonian Democrat until he and the president parted ways over treatment of the Indians. In the next Tennessee congressional election, the Democrats threw their support to another candidate, and Crockett was defeated. Disgusted with partisanship, Crockett left the arena of national politics and went to Texas, delivering, as was the custom, a resounding rendition of his farewell speech at every stop along the way. Within a year he perished defending the Alamo.

Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, which provided for the resettlement of all Native Americans then residing east of the Mississippi to a newly defined Indian Territory in what is now Oklahoma. There the Indians were to be free to pursue their lives without interference. This removal was intended to be voluntary, but groups of Indians were strongly pressured to go. The legislation affected not only the Indians in Georgia, but over 100,000 Native Americans in other states, including all of the Five Civilized Tribes.

Little recognition was given to the fact that the Indians of the east were not familiar with how to subsist in the harsh conditions of the Great Plains or that the remuneration they received for their lands would benefit them little there. In addition, many tribes harbored ancient hostilities for other tribes. The Indian Removal Act made little provision for separation of groups. Once in the territory, Indians were left to get along however they might.

Nevertheless, many Indian groups, already surrounded by white settlements, accepted the government decree and moved west. The Choctaws of Mississippi made the trek from 1831 through 1833, and the Creeks of Alabama in 1836. Only nominally voluntary, these migrations often turned into forced marches during which many perished. The Choctaws lost one-fourth of their people before arriving in Oklahoma, while the Creeks lost 3,500 of the 15,000 who began the journey.

The Cherokees were not happy with the relocation plan and resisted being forced to move. In 1831, the Cherokees turned to the courts for defense against the Indian Removal Act and against the Georgia Legislature’s nullification of Cherokee laws. Three times their cases went to the Supreme Court. In Cherokee Nation v. Georgia , Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the Cherokee had “an unquestionable right” to their lands, but that they were "not a foreign state, in the sense of the Constitution" but rather a “domestic, dependent nation” and so could not sue in a United States court over Georgia’s voiding their right to self-rule. Although this was a blow to the Cherokee case against Georgia, it cast doubt on the constitutionality of the Indian Removal Act.

In Worcester v. Georgia in 1832, the Court reversed itself and ruled that the State of Georgia could not control the Cherokee within their territory. The case revolved around two missionaries, Samuel Austin Worcester and Elizur Butler, who were welcomed by the Cherokee but who had not obtained a license under Georgia law to live on Cherokee lands. Worcester and Butler were ordered by Georgia to take an oath of allegiance to the state or leave Cherokee land. They refused and were arrested. The missionaries were consigned to hard labor on a chain gang for 16 months while the case was being decided. Later they would accompany the Cherokees on their long trek to Oklahoma. In 1992, the Georgia legislature formally pardoned Worcester and Butler.

In a third case, the Court agreed that crimes committed in Cherokee Territory were beyond the jurisdiction of the State of Georgia. This case involved a Cherokee named Corn Tassel who had been convicted in a Georgia court of murdering another Indian. Corn Tassel’s attorney appealed the conviction on the grounds that the killing had taken place in Cherokee territory, so Georgia had no right to try him. The Supreme Court sided with the Cherokees and found that the Georgia ruling was unconstitutional. President Jackson, however, made it clear that he would tolerate no independent nation within the borders of the United States. When he publicly backed Georgia, Corn Tassel was hanged. The Cherokees then understood that even the Supreme Court could not save their cause.

In backing Georgia against the Supreme Court, President Jackson was responding to pressures in several different areas. Political pressure to open Indian lands to white settlement had been mounting for some time. With increasing conflicts of interest between settlers and Indians came an ever-greater likelihood of violence not only for the Cherokees but for all Native Americans living east of the Mississippi. In addition, Jackson believed in states’ rights and wanted to limit federal power, including the power of the Supreme Court. He was also understandably concerned with the dangers inherent in granting political autonomy to groups of people wanting to establish separate laws and governments that could supersede the laws and government of a state. For these reasons he was at odds with Marshall’s Court, which felt obligated to uphold the provisions of the treaties that had already been made with the Indians. Jackson made no effort to obscure the fact that while the Court might rule whatever it pleased, the executive branch was not constrained to follow the ruling.

The Sac (Sauk), and Fox tribes of Illinois and Wisconsin were also affected by the Indian Removal Act. One Sac chief signed a treaty abandoning Indian lands east of the Mississippi, and he moved the tribes to Iowa. Chief Black Hawk, however, along with a faction from the tribes, revolted against forced removal from the land of their ancestors. In 1832, they returned to their Illinois lands and conducted a campaign of raids and ambushes. The United States Army responded and violently suppressed what the government considered an Indian insurrection. Black Hawk was captured and imprisoned in St. Louis in 1833. Among the regular army troops involved in this action was Lieutenant Jefferson Davis of Mississippi, while Captain Abraham Lincoln served with the Illinois volunteers. Thirty years later these two men would head the Confederate and Union governments during the Civil War

In the case of the Seminoles in Florida, callous and misguided decisions by the government contributed to the bloodiest Indian conflict in U.S. history. The Seminole Indians were ordered to merge with their ancestral enemy, the Creeks, for relocation. The Creeks were slaveowners, and many of the Seminoles had escaped from Creek slavery. The Seminoles were justifiably outraged and several hundred, joined by runaway black slaves, refused to leave Florida and move west. They retreated to the swamps of the Everglades, where they fought a bitter and protracted war with the United States Army. Over seven years (1835-1842), this conflict claimed the lives of 1,500 U.S. soldiers. In 1837, Chief Osceola was captured by treachery under a flag of truce and sent to a prison where he soon perished. Three thousand Seminoles were then forced to relocate to Oklahoma in a bitter forced march. Another 1,000 hid in the Everglades, however, and continued to fight for five more years. Some were never captured, and the Seminole tribe became divided by this struggle.

Jackson and Van Buren

Historians are divided on President Andrew Jackson’s feelings toward Indians. Some claim he was a virulent Indian hater and cite as evidence the fact that he commanded the American troops that killed nearly 900 Creeks in the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in 1814. On the other hand, Jackson led an invasion of Florida in 1818 to capture runaway slaves and punish those who aided them. There he ordered Indians, Spanish, and British alike hanged or otherwise killed. Rather than claim simply that Jackson was an Indian hater, it might be more accurate to say that he was a man of his times, and the times were violent. Jackson was a practical, action-oriented person, who felt it was clear that the time of the Indian nations within the states was over. That being the case, he saw no reason to prolong their inevitable departure. On the contrary, in light of the political and economic advantages to Indian removal, he insisted it be accomplished as quickly as possible.

Having served two terms, Jackson chose Martin Van Buren, his Secretary of State, to run as the Democratic candidate in 1836. Van Buren won against the newly organized, conservative Whig Party and continued the Jacksonian political tradition of championing the rights of individual citizens to prosper in America. Primarily this had been achieved by restraining monopolistic and oppressive business, as Jackson had considered the Bank of the United States to be. Making sure that new land was available for settlement had been another important part of Jackson’s political strategy.

Unlike Jackson, Van Buren was sociable, diplomatic, and not given to making strong partisan statements. His presidency was mostly concerned with countering the recession that followed the demise of the Bank of the United States and the Jacksonian policy of insisting that western lands be paid for in gold or silver. Speculation had grown out of control, banks went under, and the banknotes that served as paper currency became worthless or highly unstable in value. In addition, instabilities in the British economy and the failure of two major British banks had negative repercussions in the United States.

Unemployment in the U.S. reached 30% as wages dropped precipitously, often by half. Public relief was not considered a province of the government at that time, so hundreds of thousands of destitute people had no other assistance than what was provided by charities and volunteer organizations.

The Van Buren years suffered other difficulties, as well. A wheat crop failure forced grain prices to intolerable levels, triggering food riots in New York just as he was taking office. Later that year, Antonio López de Santa Anna wiped out the legendary force at the Alamo, and the American Sam Houston led an army that captured the Mexican general and forced him to relinquish the portion of Texas north of the Rio Grande. The Mexican government complained, but Texas wanted to join the Union. This presented a serious problem to the United States because Texas would join as a slave state and upset the delicate political balance in the country.

The Jacksonian legacy was to remove the difficult Indian element in order to allow settlement and entrepreneurship to progress unrestrained by native resistance. Van Buren inherited this situation and the mechanisms that had been established to deal with it. Distracted by economic and political matters and pressured by his mentor Jackson, Van Buren allowed the issue of the Cherokees of Georgia to be resolved by their removal to the Indian Territory in the manner conceived by the administration before him.

In 1836, the Bureau of Indian Affairs was created to handle relations with the Indians. It had no control, however, over white expansion westward. The Bureau was unable to honor many of the agreements made with the Indians. The frontier that the Bureau had claimed as a permanent settlement location for the Indians turned out to last only into the 1850s as Americans continued to push westward.

You just finished Indian Removal . Nice work!

Previous Outline Next Outline

Tip: Use ← → keys to navigate!

How to cite this note (MLA)

More apush topic outlines.

• Discovery and Settlement of the New World
• Europe and the Impulse for Exploration
• Spanish and French Exploration
• The First English Settlements
• The New England Colonies
• The Middle, Chesapeake, and Southern Colonies
• Colonial Life
• Scientific and Religious Transformation
• French and Indian War
• Imperial Reorganization
• Philosophy of American Revolution
• Declaration of Independence
• The Revolutionary War
• Articles of Confederation
• The Confederation Faces Challenges
• Philadelphia Convention
• Federalists versus Antifederalists
• Development of the Two-party System
• Jefferson as President
• War of 1812
• James Monroe
• A Growing National Economy
• The Transportation Revolution
• King Cotton
• Democracy and the “Common Man”
• Nullification Crisis
• The Bank of the United States
• Transcendentalism, Religion, and Utopian Movements
• Reform Crusades
• Manifest Destiny
• Decade of Crisis
• The Approaching War
• The Civil War
• Abolition of Slavery
• Ramifications of the Civil War
• Presidential and Congressional Reconstruction Plans
• The End of Reconstruction
• The New South
• Focus on the West
• Confrontations with Native Americans
• Cattle, Frontiers, and Farming
• End of the Frontier
• Gilded Age Scandal and Corruption
• Consumer Culture
• Rise of Unions
• Growth of Cities
• Life in the City
• Agrarian Revolt
• The Progressive Impulse
• The Progressive Presidents
• McKinley and Roosevelt
• Taft and Wilson
• U.S. Entry into WWI
• Peace Conferences
• Social Tensions
• Causes and Consequences
• The New Deal
• The Failures of Diplomacy
• The Second World War
• The Home Front
• Wartime Diplomacy
• Containment
• Conflict in Asia
• Red Scare -- Again
• Internal Improvements
• Foreign Policy
• Challenging Jim Crow
• Consequences of the Civil Rights Movement
• Material Culture
• JFK - John F. Kennedy
• LBJ - Lyndon Baines Johnson
• Nixon and Foreign Policy
• Nixon and Domestic Issues
• Ford, Carter, and Reagan
• Moving into a New Millennium
• 378,559 views (88 views per day)
• Posted 12 years ago

You may opt out or contact us anytime.

Get More Zócalo

Eclectic but curated. Smart without snark. Ideas journalism with a head and heart.

Zócalo Podcasts

How the Forced Removal of the Southeast’s Indians Turned Native Lands into Slave Plantations

President jackson and king cotton made indigenous americans walk the trail of tears.

Painting of a Choctaw village, by François Bernard (1869). Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons .

By Christina Snyder | January 2, 2018

Before that, the South was Indian country.

The South’s long and rich Indigenous history is unknown to many Americans. But once you look, the signs are everywhere: in Native place names (Alabama, Arkansas, Chattahoochee, Tallahassee, Tennessee); in hundreds of earthen mounds—some half-destroyed, others still towering; and in the Native communities that remain in or near their homelands.

Native people and their pasts have been marginalized in Southern history because Indian Removal, the cornerstone of Andrew Jackson’s presidency, sought to erase Southern Indians—from the land and from historical memory.

Uncovering the history of Southern Indians reveals that the Old South was more than the Confederacy and Lost Cause mythology. Before the European invasion and even into the colonial period, the South had the highest Native population density north of Mexico. And long before secessionists tried to distinguish themselves from other Americans, Native peoples of the South recognized cultural commonalities, and distinguished themselves from their Iroquoian rivals to the north by calling themselves “Southern nations.”

Southern Native women, who managed agriculture, developed specialized regional varieties of corn. Thanks to the region’s subtropical climate, they produced two crops per year. Women’s leading role in farming is probably related to the region’s matrilineal kinship system, wherein families reckoned descent through the mother and passed property and titles through the maternal line.

In time, the region’s large population, agricultural productivity, and booming trade networks gave rise to chiefdoms, nations, and even cities. The largest city was Cahokia, just east of modern-day St. Louis, which was bigger than London when it boomed around 1050 A.D. Cahokia boasted almost 20,000 residents in town and another 20,000 in the surrounding areas. It took centuries of North American colonialism for European settlers to surpass it, when Philadelphia did so in the 1760s.

Although most Americans associate the Trail of Tears exclusively with the Cherokee Nation, Indian Removal was a blanket policy aimed at “removing” all Eastern Indians west of the Mississippi River. In total, 100,000 Indians were forced to leave. Most came from the South, where settlers coveted the rich lands—potential cotton fields—still controlled by large Indian nations.

There had been removals before. Beginning in the 17th century, colonists forced some Indian nations onto small reservations after devastating wars. After the Revolution, the United States aggressively sought Indian land through warfare and treaties.

The Indian Removal Act, passed in 1830, was different. For the first time, Congress and the president used the power of the federal government to undertake removal on a massive scale. Despite objections from many corners—the U.S. Supreme Court, Indian leaders, and activists—Jackson pushed ahead, exceeding the letter of the law to achieve removal by any means.

Many U.S. citizens championed Jackson’s resolve, especially the newly empowered middle-income and poor white men eager to claim the spoils of Indian country. In addition to economic demand, Jackson and his allies seized on a new racial ideology.

Formerly, most U.S. policymakers, influenced by the Enlightenment, argued that environment—culture, language, food, and education—accounted for human differences. Beginning in the 1820s, however, the new pseudoscience of phrenology declared that human differences were biological and immutable. Conveniently, white supremacists cited this theory to support Indian Removal and the growth of slavery. Contested at the time, and then firmly discredited, “scientific racism” unleashed monstrous legacies that persist to plague our present.

In addition to stoking racism, Jackson persuaded U.S. citizens that removal would cost them little. He proposed to hire private contractors, awarding each contract to the lowest bidder, with very little oversight. The resulting corruption and negligence, combined with the sheer scale of the endeavor, was what gave the “Trail of Tears” its name. One contractor who received almost $20,000 bragged to a colleague that “he had never issued a single ration.” A Seminole reported that this was typical, explaining that “rations [were] issued irregularly; when due, not delivered; and when delivered but half issued.”

Some women were forced to trade sex for food. Among the starving and poorly clad emigrants, disease ran rampant. Indian Removal coincided with America’s first cholera epidemic—sometimes 40 percent of a camp died overnight. Smallpox, influenza, and yellow fever struck, too. One U.S. official argued that medicine should be issued as a standard provision, but his superiors disagreed.

The tears did not stop once emigrants reached Indian Territory (roughly present-day Oklahoma), where famine, disease, and extreme weather heightened mortality. The suffering was so great that the federal government replaced many private contractors with U.S. Army officers, reasoning that the latter had greater experience with the logistics of mass movement. Still, about 20 percent of those forced to remove died, either on the trail or shortly after arrival in Indian Territory.

Peter Pitchlynn, whose Choctaw people were the first to suffer removal, returned to his homeland—now called Mississippi—15 years later and reflected on the transformation: “This once was a healthy country, but it is now a very sickly one & so changed that I scarcely know any of the places which were once familiar to me.” Gone were the wide-canopied forests teeming with deer, the wild canebreaks where his people had gathered reeds for baskets, and his boyhood camping ground. The only thing that had not changed much was his family home, though it was now occupied by a white family.

The disease that, in Pitchlynn’s view, had sickened and warped the country was the plantation economy. Maddened by what was then called “Alabama Fever,” whites swarmed into newly ceded Indian land—many even jumped the gun—and planted cotton. Initially, most settlers lived in modest cabins or confiscated Indian homes, but in time some grew rich. They built big houses, acquired more land, and pushed small landholders to the economic margins.

And their voracious demand for slave labor led to another massive population shift: African Americans were forced from the Eastern Seaboard and Upper South into the notoriously harsh slavery of the expanding cotton frontier. The plantation economy of the South grew so vast and powerful that it obscured most everything that came before it. Likewise, the memory of that particular South attacks most everything that has tried to replace it.

We should not underestimate the pernicious influence that the cotton curtain still exerts on race, class, and gender relations in the South and beyond. At the same time, we should also remember that the Old South was not really that old. Forged in blood and fire, the plantation economy existed across much of the Deep South for only a generation or two before the Civil War.

The South was and is a diverse place, a meeting ground of cultures, a destination for immigrants, a staging ground for different dreams. And the South is still Indian country. About 10 percent of Native people managed to avoid removal, and their descendants remain in the region.

Each year, some of their exiled kinfolk travel the Trail of Tears in reverse. They remember, and so should we all. The cotton curtain was woven to conceal other pasts and narrow possible futures, but we can push beyond it and gain a broader view.

Send A Letter To the Editors

Please tell us your thoughts. Include your name and daytime phone number, and a link to the article you’re responding to. We may edit your letter for length and clarity and publish it on our site.

(Optional) Attach an image to your letter. Jpeg, PNG or GIF accepted, 1MB maximum.

By continuing to use our website, you agree to our privacy and cookie policy . Zócalo wants to hear from you. Please take our survey !-->

No paywall. No ads. No partisan hacks. Ideas journalism with a head and a heart.

• Teacher Opportunities
• AP U.S. Government Key Terms
• Bureaucracy & Regulation
• Campaigns & Elections
• Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
• Comparative Government
• Constitutional Foundation
• Criminal Law & Justice
• Economics & Financial Literacy
• English & Literature
• Environmental Policy & Land Use
• Executive Branch
• Federalism and State Issues
• Foreign Policy
• Gun Rights & Firearm Legislation
• Immigration
• Interest Groups & Lobbying
• Judicial Branch
• Legislative Branch
• Political Parties
• Science & Technology
• Social Services
• State History
• Supreme Court Cases
• U.S. History
• World History

Log-in to bookmark & organize content - it's free!

• Bell Ringers
• Lesson Plans
• Featured Resources

Lesson Plan: The Indian Removal Act of 1830

The Indian Removal Act of 1830

Paul Chaat Smith, Associate Curator at the National Museum of the American Indian, talked about the events leading to the passage of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the reasons why it was proposed.

Description

This lesson explores the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and how it affected different Native American groups. Students will learn about the reasons why the U.S. government implemented this policy and look at the experiences of three different groups that were removed from their ancestral homelands. Students will demonstrate their understanding of the impact of the Indian Removal Act by completing one of tasks on a choice board.

Being class by having them brainstorm what they already know about Native Americans.

VOCABULARY INTRODUCTION:

After discussing the warm-up question, have the students complete the vocabulary activity. If using their personal devices, they should make a copy of the Google Slide and match each term to the appropriate definition. If they are using this as a printed handout, they can draw arrows to the correct match.

VOCABULARY ACTIVITY: Indian Removal Act Vocabulary Activity (Google Slide)

Students will match definitions for the following vocabulary terms:

• Indian Nation
• Reservation

Trail of Tears

INTRODUCTION:

After reviewing the students’ responses to the brainstorm, address any misconceptions about Native Americans in the early 1800s.

Use the following video clip and questions to introduce the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Students can access all video clips and activities using the handout.

HANDOUT: The Indian Removal Act of 1830 (Google Doc)

VIDEO CLIP 1: The Indian Removal Act of 1830 (2:43)

What is meant by “American democracy was on trial”?

What were the “problems” that states faced prior to the Indian Removal Act?

What did the Indian Removal Act of 1830 do?

• Why do you think the U.S. government wanted to remove Indians at this time?

EXPLORATION:

Review the students’ answers to the previous questions. Address any misunderstandings.

Using the handout, have the students view each video and answer the guiding questions and/or complete the note-taking chart.

VIDEO CLIP 2: Tribal Treaties and the Indian Removal Act (5:02)

What was the purpose of the Indian Removal Act of 1830?

How did different villages react to the Indian Removal Act of 1830?

How did the different decisions made by the villages impact how they were treated by the U.S. government?

What tactics did the U.S. government use to force removal of the Potawatomi?

• Where did the Potawatomi people originate?

VIDEO CLIP 3: Cherokee People and Indian Removal (2:45)

What was Ross’s Landing? Why was its location significant?

How was Ross’s Landing significant to the Trail of Tears?

Describe the actions by the U.S. government during the removal process.

Where did many of the Cherokees originate?

• Describe the events that occurred at Ross’s landing and Bligh’s Ferry.

VIDEO CLIP 4: Indian Removal and the Muscogee Tribe (4:44)

Where did the Muscogee people originate?

Describe the size and scope of the removal of the Muscogee people.

What role did Fort Gibson play during the removal of the Muscogee people?

• What factors contributed to the large amount of deaths during removal?

APPLICATION AND DEMONSTRATION OF LEARNING:

Students will demonstrate their understanding by completing one of the tasks listed below and included on the choice board . Students can choose which of the tasks they would like to complete.

Venn Diagram: Choose two of the Native American groups from the clips and compare and contrast their experiences during Indian removal and how it impacted them.

Art Gallery: Develop at least three pieces of art (painting, drawing, sculpture, etc…) that reflect the impact of Indian removal on Native American.

Diary Entry: Choose one of the Native American groups mentioned in the clips. Create a diary entry from the perspective of someone from that group that shows how the Indian Removal Act impacted them.

Constructed Response: In 2-3 paragraphs, respond to the following prompt: How were Native American groups impacted by the Indian Removal Act of 1830?

Poem: Using the information from the video clips, write and perform a poem. The song or poem should illustrate the impact of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 on Native Americans.

Video Presentation: Create a one-minute video that explains the impact that of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 on Native Americans.

Create Test Questions: Using the information from the video clips, create five test questions that would assess other students’ understanding of the impact of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 on Native Americans.

Mapping Indian Removal: Using a blank map of the United States , map the path of the three groups of Native Americans included in the video clips. Include a key to indicate their homelands, path and final location.

• Argumentative Essay: In 2-3 paragraphs, answer the following prompt: In the introductory video clip, the curator describes the Trail of Tears as American democracy being on trial. Did American live up to its democratic ideals during this time? Use examples from the video to support your argument.

EXTENSION AND ALTERNATIVE ACTIVITY:

Analyzing the Impact of Indian Removal on the United States- View the following video clip. Using this video clip and the previous video clips from the lesson to discuss the following prompt: What is the most significant consequence of the Indian Removal Act? Support your answer with examples from the videos.

Clip: The Impact of the Indian Removal Act (4:34)

Additional Resources

• Bell Ringer: Indian Removal Act of 1830
• Native American and American Indian History Resources - Google Docs
• Ancestral Homeland
• Cherokee Nation
• Citizen Potawatomi
• Fort Gibson
• Indian Removal Act Of 1830
• Indian Territory
• Trail Of Death
• Trail Of Tears

Milestone Documents

President Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress 'On Indian Removal' (1830)

Citation: President Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress "On Indian Removal"; 12/6/1830; Presidential Messages, 1789 - 1875; Records of the U.S. Senate, Record Group 46; National Archives Building, Washington, DC.

View All Pages in the National Archives Catalog

View Transcript

On December 6, 1830, in his annual message to Congress, President Andrew Jackson informed Congress on the progress of the removal of Indian tribes living east of the Mississippi River to land in the west.

In the early 1800s, American demand for Indian nations' land increased, and momentum grew to force American Indians further west. The first major step to relocate American Indians came when Congress passed, and President Andrew Jackson signed, the Indian Removal Act of May 28, 1830.

The Act authorized the President to negotiate removal treaties with Indian tribes living east of the Mississippi River, primarily in the states of Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, and others. The goal was to remove all American Indians living in existing states and territories and send them to unsettled land in the west.

In his message on December 6, 1830, President Jackson informed Congress on the progress of the removal, stating, "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."

Jackson declared that removal would "incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier." Clearing Alabama and Mississippi of their Indian populations, he said, would "enable those states to advance rapidly in population, wealth, and power."

By the end of Jackson’s Presidency, his administration had negotiated almost 70 removal treaties. These led to the relocation of nearly 50,000 eastern Indians to the Indian Territory—what later became eastern Oklahoma. It opened up 25 million acres of eastern land to white settlement and, since the bulk of the land was in the American south, to the expansion of slavery.

Perhaps the most well-known treaty, the Treaty of New Echota, ratified in 1836, called for the removal of the Cherokees living in Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Alabama. The treaty was opposed by many members of the Cherokee Nation; and when they refused to leave, Maj. Gen. Winfield Scott was ordered to push them out. He was given 3,000 troops and the authority to raise additional state militia and volunteer troops to force removal.

Despite Scott’s order calling for the removal of Indians in a humane fashion, this did not happen. During the fall and winter of 1838-39, the Cherokees were forcibly moved from their homes to the Indian Territory—some having to walk as many as 1,000 miles over a four-month period. Approximately 4,000 of 16,000 Cherokees died along the way. This sad chapter in our history is known as the "Trail of Tears."

By the 1840s, nearly all Indian tribes had been driven west, which is exactly what the Indian Removal Act intended to accomplish.

Teach with this document.

Previous Document Next Document

Andrew Jackson's Annual Message

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. Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining tribes also to seek the same obvious advantages.

The consequences of a speedy removal will be important to the United States, to individual States, and to the Indians themselves. The pecuniary advantages which it promises to the Government are the least of its recommendations. It puts an end to all possible danger of collision between the authorities of the General and State Governments on account of the Indians. It will place a dense and civilized population in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters. By opening the whole territory between Tennessee on the north and Louisiana on the south to the settlement of the whites it will incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier and render the adjacent States strong enough to repel future invasions without remote aid. It will relieve the whole State of Mississippi and the western part of Alabama of Indian occupancy, and enable those States to advance rapidly in population, wealth, and power. 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.

What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization and religion?

The present policy of the Government is but a continuation of the same progressive change by a milder process. The tribes which occupied the countries now constituting the Eastern States were annihilated or have melted away to make room for the whites. The waves of population and civilization are rolling to the westward, and we now propose to acquire the countries occupied by the red men of the South and West by a fair exchange, and, at the expense of the United States, to send them to land where their existence may be prolonged and perhaps made perpetual. Doubtless it will be painful to leave the graves of their fathers; but what do they more than our ancestors did or than our children are now doing? To better their condition in an unknown land our forefathers left all that was dear in earthly objects. Our children by thousands yearly leave the land of their birth to seek new homes in distant regions. Does Humanity weep at these painful separations from everything, animate and inanimate, with which the young heart has become entwined? Far from it. It is rather a source of joy that our country affords scope where our young population may range unconstrained in body or in mind, developing the power and facilities of man in their highest perfection. These remove hundreds and almost thousands of miles at their own expense, purchase the lands they occupy, and support themselves at their new homes from the moment of their arrival. Can it be cruel in this Government when, by events which it can not control, the Indian is made discontented in his ancient home to purchase his lands, to give him a new and extensive territory, to pay the expense of his removal, and support him a year in his new abode? How many thousands of our own people would gladly embrace the opportunity of removing to the West on such conditions! If the offers made to the Indians were extended to them, they would be hailed with gratitude and joy.

And is it supposed that the wandering savage has a stronger attachment to his home than the settled, civilized Christian? Is it more afflicting to him to leave the graves of his fathers than it is to our brothers and children? Rightly considered, the policy of the General Government toward the red man is not only liberal, but generous. He is unwilling to submit to the laws of the States and mingle with their population. 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.

(part 3 of 7) National Archives Bankhead National Forest, Alabama "Their environments shaped their senses of identity." These five tribes of the southeast were village dwellers. They clustered around streams and rivers, which generally defined territorial hunting ranges. They raised numerous varieties of corn, beans, and squashes, but their primary supply of meat came from hunting. Deer, bear, and woodland buffalo were their prey. Their environments shaped their senses of identity. The tribes of the southeast maintained a delicate balance with the forces of the environment around them. The woods were full of spiritual forces who could harm someone who wandered alone into their domain. Violent storms, sudden floods in the river valleys, lightning-set fires in the woods, all were reminders of the power of the world. The Green Corn ceremony, variations of which occurred in the Cherokee, Creek, and Chickasaw communities, renewed the world in the spring for the upcoming year. During the late eighteenth century, major changes began to affect the lifestyles of the southeastern native people. The introduction of domesticated livestock among the Choctaws in the 1790s provided a new source of food that began to replace deer meat in the diet. Hunting deer for skins to trade with French and English agents had depleted deer populations throughout the southeast. Although domesticated cattle roamed free in the forests and prairies, they could be easily captured. Other introductions to the Choctaw diet included domesticated pigs and potatoes, and some families cultivated fields of cotton. By the early 1800s a missionary could report that Choctaw women had spinning wheels, cards, and were weaving yards of cloth. Voluntary removal, late 1700s-early 1800s Although Indian removal is generally associated with the 1830 act of Congress, the process was already beginning by the late 1700s. Pressure of white settlement led small parties of Choctaws, Cherokees, and Chickasaws to move west of the Mississippi, and by 1807 they were settling in Arkansas, Indian Territory, and east Texas. There they could hunt and raise their crops. This voluntary removal to escape conflict with white settlers and government agents thus preceded forced removals. Federal policy toward Indians was ambivalent. Thomas Jefferson acquired the Louisiana Territory in part to find a place for Indian communities who would not assimilate into white society and who wished to pursue their traditional hunting ways of life, but he also promoted government-run trading posts in Indian country so that Indians would build up such great debts that they would be willing to give up some of their land in payment. Indians might choose to move, but Jefferson also found ways to force them to make the choice. C. Piereman Warrant issued to a Revolutionary War soldier for 100 acres of western land as payment for his service, 1784 enlarge image Despite the integration of domesticated cattle and the technology of weaving into their lifestyles, Americans still considered the southeastern tribes savages. The increasing American population led to pressure to develop new western lands. The War of 1812, a definitive victory over the English, gave Americans a sense of national identity, but it also created a need for Indian land. The United States paid its soldiers from the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 not with money but with warrants that they could exchange for western land. "In going up the stream there were houses and farms on both banks of the River. The houses were decently furnished, and their farms were well fenced and stocked with cattle. They had everything they needed: food, clothes, water and good land." Nuttall, Journal , 1819, on a Cherokee band in the Arkansas Territory The pressure for the development of western lands required the removal of Indians from those lands. Even while government agents were holding out promises of western lands that would be theirs forever, Americans were exploring those lands. In 1819, Thomas Nuttall, an English botanist, traveled to the Arkansas territory. His account painted a picture of a fertile and productive environment for agriculture, a description seemingly designed to inspire interest in the minds of land speculators. The Choctaw leader Pushmataha, however, when pressed to sign a treaty ceding his tribe's land in central Mississippi in exchange for others in the west, protested: "We wish to remain here, where we have grown up as the herbs of the woods; and do not wish to be transplanted into another soil." "Indeed most of the streams on this side of the Arkansas are said to afford springs of salt water which might be wrought with profit." Thomas Nuttall, A Journal of Travels into the Arkansas Territory during the Year 1819 In the period between 1817 and 1825, however, the tribes signed treaties agreeing to exchange eastern lands for western ones. These early treaties did not require the tribes to move west, and most remained in their homes, but small vanguards crossed the Mississippi to take up residence in the new territory, some joining relatives already settled there. Some Choctaw families moved after the Treaty of Doaks Stand, signed in 1820. Some Creek and Cherokee groups moved west after treaties they signed in 1818. The pressures on the tribes culminated in 1829 and 1830 when the legislatures of Mississippi and Georgia passed laws to extend their jurisdiction over the Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Cherokee Nations. The actions brought into sharp relief the dilemma that faced the tribes. Were they to submit to the laws of a foreign government to remain in the lands that they considered their homeland, or were they to move to the west to retain their autonomy? FLA SA Sorrows of the Seminoles, Banished from Florida , c. 1835 Song about the Seminoles' departure sung in the Muskogee language.   Library of Congress Congress followed the actions of the states with the 1830 Indian Removal Act that directed the federal government to negotiate with Indian tribes to exchange their lands east of the Mississippi River for lands to the west. Under the provisions of the act, the Choctaws, the Chickasaws, Cherokees, Creeks, and ultimately the Seminoles, who had fled to Florida in the early nineteenth century, moved to Indian Territory (what is now the state of Oklahoma) in the period from 1831 through the 1840s. "it is (with sorrow) that we are forced by the authority of the white man to quit the scenes of our childhood, but stern necessity says we must go, and we bid a final farewell to it and all we hold dear East of the Father of Waters . . ." George Hicks, Cherokee, on the "Trail of Tears," November 1838   full text continued

• Library of Congress
• Research Guides
• Main Reading Room

Indian Removal Act: Primary Documents in American History

Digital collections.

• Introduction
• Related Online Resources
• External Websites
• Print Resources

History, Humanities & Social Sciences : Ask a Librarian

Have a question? Need assistance? Use our online form to ask a librarian for help.

Chat with a librarian , Monday through Friday, 12-4pm Eastern Time (except Federal Holidays).

The digital collections of the Library of Congress contain a wide variety of primary source materials associated with the Indian Removal Act and its after-effects, including government documents, manuscripts, printed ephemera, and maps. Provided below is a link to the home page for each relevant digital collection along with selected highlights.

Congressional Publications

• A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875 This collection contains congressional publications from 1774 to 1875, including debates, bills, laws, and journals.

Indian Removal Act Debate References:

 References to debate on the Indian Removal Act (S. 102) can be found in the Register of Debates on the following dates:

• February 22, 1830 The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs issued a report (S.doc.61).
• February 22, 1830 Senator Hugh White, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, reported A Bill to provide for an exchange of lands with the Indians residing in any of the States or Territories, and for their removal West of the river Mississippi (S. 102).
• April 9, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 15, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 17, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 20, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 21, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 22, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 23, 1830 (Debated in the Senate)
• April 24, 1830 The Senate voted 28 to 19 to pass the Indian Removal Act (S. 102).
• May 15, 1830 (Debated in the House of Representative)
• May 17, 1830 (Debated in the House of Representatives)
• May 18, 1830 (Debated in the House of Representatives)
• May 19, 1830 (Debated in the House of Representatives)
• May 24, 1830 (Debated in the House of Representatives)
• May 26, 1830 The House of Representatives voted 102 to 97 to pass the Indian Removal Act (S. 102).
• May 26, 1830 (Senate concurred in House amendments)
• May 28, 1830 The Indian Removal Act was signed into law by President Andrew Jackson.
• December 6, 1830 President Andrew Jackson outlined his Indian removal policy in his Second Annual Message to Congress. Jackson's comments on Indian removal begin with the 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. Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining tribes also to seek the same obvious advantages."

United States Congressional Serial Set

The Serial Set contains House and Senate documents and reports. Items related to the Indian Removal Act include:

• Correspondence on the subject of the emigration of Indians : between the 30th November, 1831, and 27th December, 1833, with abstracts of expenditures by disbursing agents, in the removal and subsistence of Indians
• Indian Land Cessions in the United States, 1784-1894.

Andrew Jackson Papers

A selection of references to the Indian Removal Act includes:

• Alfred Balch to Andrew Jackson, January 8, 1830. Excerpt: "I flatter myself that Mr Bell will do justice to the interesting subject committed to his charge as Chairman of the committee of Indian Affairs— The removal of the Indians would be an act of seeming violence—But it will prove in the end an act of enlarged philanthropy. These untutored sons of the Forest, cannot exist in a state of Independence, in the vicinity of the white man. If they will persist in remaining where they are, they may begin to dig their graves and prepare to die."
• Andrew Jackson to John Pitchlynn, August 5, 1830. Excerpt: "I beg of you to say to them, that their interest happiness peace & prosperity depends upon their removal beyond the jurisdiction of the laws of the State of Mississippi. These things have been [often times] explained to them fully and I forbear to repeat them; but request that you make known to them that Congress to enable them to remove & comfortably to arrange themselves at their new homes has made liberal appropriations. It was a measure I had much at heart & sought to effect because I was satisfied that the Indians could not possibly live under the laws of the States. If now they shall refuse to accept the liberal terms offered, they only must be liable for whatever evils & dificulties may arise. I feel conscious of having done my duty to my red children and if any failure of my good intention arises, it will be attributable to their want of duty to themselves, not to me."
• Andrew Jackson to Chickasaw Chiefs, August 23, 1830. Excerpt: "Brothers! If you are disposed to remove say so, and state the terms you may consider just and equitable."
• Andrew Jackson, December 6, 1830, 2nd Annual Message - Drafts regarding Indian Affairs.

Historic Newspapers

A selection of articles includes:

• "Removal of the Indians," Cherokee Phoenix, and Indians' Advocate. (New Echota [Ga.]), May 15, 1830.
• "Treaty with the Cherokees," The North-Carolina Standard. (Raleigh, N.C.), January 21, 1836.
• "Major General Scott, of the U. States Army, sends to the Cherokee People Remaining in North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and Alabama, this Address," The North-Carolina Standard. (Raleigh, N.C.), June 6, 1838.
• "Latest from the Cherokees," Vermont Phœnix. (Brattleboro, Vt.), June 15, 1838.
• Collections with Maps The Library of Congress has custody of the largest and most comprehensive cartographic collection in the world.

Selected highlights includes:

• Map showing the lands assigned to emigrant Indians west of Arkansas and Missouri.
• Indian land cessions in the United States.
• A map of that part of Georgia occupied by the Cherokee Indians, taken from an actual survey made during the present year 1831.
• Indian territory: compiled under the direction of the Hon. John H. Oberly, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, by C.A. Maxwell. Shows the lands occupied by various tribes and includes details about land transfers and cessions. 1889.

Martin Van Buren Papers

Selected highlights from this collection:

• Letter, Martin Van Buren to Maj. Gen. Winfield Scott, April 11, 1838 (record copy), regarding Indian removal policies and the Cherokee nation's forced migration, which became known as the "Trail of Tear."
• Letter, Andrew Jackson to Martin Van Buren, July 6, 1838 A transcript of this letter is also available in this collection. On the third page of the letter Andrew Jackson discusses the removal of the Cherokees.

Printed Ephemera

• Andrew Jackson President of the United States of America, to all and singular to whom these presents shall come, greeting: Whereas a treaty between the United States of America, and the Mingoes, chiefs, captains and warriors, of the Choctaw Nation...1830.
• By the president of the United States in pursuance of the provisions of a treaty between the United States and the Chickasaw Indians, made and concluded on Pontotoc Creek, on the twentieth day of October 1832...
• Circular of the New-York Committee in aid of the Cherokee nation ... New York, February 10, 1832.
• Orders No. [25] Head Quarters, Eastern Division Cherokee Agency, Ten. May 17, 1838. [n. p. 1838].
• << Previous: Introduction
• Next: Related Online Resources >>
• Last Updated: Aug 1, 2024 7:13 AM
• URL: https://guides.loc.gov/indian-removal-act

• Skip to global NPS navigation
• Skip to the main content
• Skip to the footer section

Exiting nps.gov

American expansion turns to official indian removal.

Euro-Americans were more interested in settled agriculture in the Old Northwest than they were in sustaining the fur trade that had characterized the region for more than a century. Americans aggressively pushed Indians to become virtually indistinguishable from themselves, or failing that, to relocate them from areas of American settlement altogether, a political development that came to characterize US relations in the 1800s with Indian nations westward all the way to the Pacific.

The haunting stories of the forced removal of tens of thousands of Indians from their homelands—such as the Cherokee Trail of Tears—were in many ways a direct result of the War of 1812’s outcome and the power shifts in North America.

Indian Removal as an Idea

Wisconsin Historical Society, WHS-64629

Removal was sometimes presented as a benevolent process. Lewis Cass, for example, the governor of the Michigan Territory from 1813 to 1831, believed that removing Indians to territories west of the Mississippi River would be the only means of ensuring Native American survival during a time of encroaching American settlement. Regardless of Cass’s rationale, his role in negotiating the Treaty of Fort Meigs (1817) signaled the formal cession of all Indian territory in the Ohio Valley. In 1836, then US Secretary of War, Cass wrote: “the Indians now holding lands in the vicinity of Green Bay can only be considered as temporary residents there.” From the perspective of individuals like Cass, the Mississippi River would become the new dividing line between Native and US settlement. Less than a century earlier, at the conclusion of the French and Indian War, the British had similarly proposed a dividing line that was as far east as the Appalachian Mountains. The Americans were focused on territorial expansion.

With the election of President Andrew Jackson in 1828, the adoption of Indian westward removal as official federal policy became an inevitability. Implementing the Indian Removal Act (1830) became one of the highest priorities of Jackson, a frontiersman from Tennessee and a famed Indian fighter who was interested in developing the region west of the Appalachians. Some tribal communities sought to avoid removal and maintain their territorial integrity by patterning their lives after Americans to demonstrate their ability to peacefully coexist and successfully adopt the “civilized” and Christian ways of their white neighbors. Jackson, however, was skeptical of Indian incorporation into American society and ultimately believed that Native people forestalled the development of the trans-Appalachian region and still posed a threat as potential allies to the British.

Indian Removal as Policy

The Indian Removal Act authorized the negotiation of treaties that would exchange Indian lands in the east for land in the unorganized territories of the trans-Mississippi West. The prospect of removal sharply divided many Native communities, with some tribal members completely opposing removal and others hoping to actively negotiate for the most favorable terms possible in light of what they believed to be an inevitable process of forced relocation. Under significant external pressure, some groups did voluntarily move west; such stories complicate the dominant historical narrative, which maintains that the United States simply swept away the vestiges of Indian communities in the east. Nonetheless, the US military and volunteer militiamen forcibly uprooted many communities that did not willingly move westward across the Mississippi River.

Within three decades of the war of 1812, the policy of Indian removal had dramatically transformed the map of Native America and traumatized entire indigenous communities. The haunting stories of the forced removal of tens of thousands of Indians from their homelands—such as the Cherokee Trail of Tears—were in many ways a direct result of the War of 1812’s outcome and the power shifts in North America. The removal policy contributed to the wide dispersal of tribal communities beyond their original homelands. For instance, forced migration partly explains why there are currently Potawatomi communities in four states: Kansas, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Michigan. However, Indian removal in the Great Lakes region was neither total nor inevitable. Indeed, many Native people resisted removal after the Americans gained control of the region. Many Ho-Chunks, for example, returned east to Wisconsin even after their forced relocation to Nebraska.

The era of removal was also a period of Indian land cessions. Faced with the possibility of military force, many tribes throughout the Great Lakes region agreed to massive reductions of their land base. Instead of being forced westward, many Native people were banished to isolated reservations that were generally undesirable for white agricultural purposes. Native communities were often sharply divided when faced with such removal and land cession pressures. In Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, nearly the entire Ojibwe homeland—except for a handful of small reservations—had been taken through a series of treaties by 1867.

Part of a series of articles titled Erosion of the Middle Ground: Native Peoples of the Great Lakes Region after 1815 .

Previous: Re-drawing the Line: American Agriculture Buries Native Alliances

Next: Hidden in Plain View: Native Strategies of Resistance to Indian Removal

You Might Also Like

• war of 1812
• american indians
• peace and remembrance
• creating a legacy
• native american history
• colonialism
• indian removal

Last updated: August 14, 2017

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

This Day In History : May 28

Changing the day will navigate the page to that given day in history. You can navigate days by using left and right arrows

Andrew Jackson signs the Indian Removal Act into law

On May 28, 1830, President Andrew Jackson signs the Indian Removal Act into law. The bill enabled the federal government to negotiate with southeastern Native American tribes for their ancestral lands in states such as Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee. As a result, some 60,000 Native Americans were forced westward into “Indian Territory” (present-day Oklahoma). The mass migration resulted in more than 4,000 deaths and became known as the Trail of Tears .

At the time, Jackson said the removal would "incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier,” and would enable new states like Alabama and Mississippi to “advance rapidly in population, wealth and power." By the end of his presidency in 1837, his administration negotiated almost 70 removal treaties that led to the relocation of 50,000 eastern Native Americans to the Indian Territory. Twenty five million acres of land were now freed up for white settlement in the east and as a result used for the expansion of slavery.

Some tribes including the Cherokees refused to leave their homes and were pushed out by the U.S. military between 1838 and 1839. Thousands of Native Americans died traveling thousands of miles through harsh weather toward unknown territory they were to call home.

By 1840, nearly all Native American tribes were driven west, and the Indian Removal Act had achieved its purpose.

Also on This Day in History May | 28

Barry Bonds hits 715th home run to pass Babe Ruth on MLB list

Terrorists attack ahmadiyya mosques in pakistan.

This Day in History Video: What Happened on May 28

Palestine liberation organization is founded, spanish armada sets sail to secure english channel, first blood of the french and indian war.

Wake Up to This Day in History

Sign up now to learn about This Day in History straight from your inbox. Get all of today's events in just one email featuring a range of topics.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Ethiopian capital falls to rebels, ending 17 years of Marxist rule

Appeal for amnesty campaign launches, baseball owners allow dodgers and giants to move, john steinbeck publishes "tortilla flat", irene cara has a #1 pop hit with the "flashdance" theme, comic phil hartman killed by wife, murder suspect removed after three days perched on crane, a single horsehair helps convict the killer of nancy titterton, president lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus is challenged.

Home — Essay Samples — History — Trail of Tears — Indian Removal Act and the Trail of Tears

Indian Removal Act and The Trail of Tears

• Categories: Cherokee Removal Indian Removal Act Trail of Tears

About this sample

Words: 1135 |

Published: Jul 17, 2018

Words: 1135 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1536 words

6 pages / 2599 words

2 pages / 1046 words

1 pages / 526 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Trail of Tears

Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, is often hailed as a hero for his role in expanding democracy and defending the interests of the common man. However, a closer examination of his actions reveals a [...]

The Cherokee Trail of Tears is a harrowing and tragic chapter in American history that has left a lasting impact on the Cherokee people and the broader narrative of Indigenous rights in the United States. This forced relocation, [...]

The Trail of Tears is a somber chapter in American history, marked by the forced removal of thousands of Native Americans from their ancestral lands. This tragic event has left a lasting impact on indigenous communities and [...]

Count Camillo di Cavour, a statesman and a leading figure in the Italian unification, played a crucial role in the process of bringing together the various states of the Italian peninsula into a single unified nation. Cavour’s [...]

The history of relations between the white colonists and Native American tribes in Northern America is full of violent acts of injustice. However, some events can still shock with the unfairness and brutality that the US side [...]

John Enle, who was a sixth generation North Carolinian, grew up in Penland, North Carolina on a land once used as hunting grounds by the Cherokee. He is the author of 14 highly acclaimed works such as The Winter People. The [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Indian Removal Act - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

The Indian Removal Act (1830) was a significant legislation that led to the forced relocation of Native American tribes. Essays might discuss its historical context, consequences, and the broader impact on Native American and US history. We have collected a large number of free essay examples about Indian Removal Act you can find at Papersowl. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Andrew Jackson and Indian Removal Act Essay

One of America’s most important and most controversial presidents, Andrew Jackson is also one of our least understood. Perhaps the biggest controversy Andrew faced was when he signed the Indian Removal Act. This forced five Native American Indian tribes to be moved so that America could use the land. At the time, his actions in the office may be questionable to some, but no one can deny how beneficial he was for our country at that time. Despite him being […]

Trail of Tears: Indian Removal Act

Historians today are still divided on President Andrew Jackson’s actions toward Native Americans in the 1830s, which included the Indian Removal and The Trail of Tears. Despite alternate ideas upon this matter, his actions toward Native Americans benefited them in the long term. That is not to say that that Jackson’s policy did not cause suffering, loss and even death for the Native American tribes who were impacted by his policy. It clearly did, in what was a turbulent time […]

Native American Society

The Native American society before the Europeans came to North America was split into 27 different states. Their food sources consisted of corn, potatoes, pumpkin, yams, and lima beans as they were native plants that could be farmed for human consumption. More than half of the modern American farming crops are endemic to North America. Other products the Native Americans used before the colonist came were medicines that were the same as Europe. They also mined materials such as copper, […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Manifest Destiny and the Indian Removal Act

Indian Relocation The Indian Relocation was a removal of several Indian tribes known as the Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, and Cherokee. The Indian Removal Act was passed by the Congress of the United States and signed by Andrew Jackson. Although meanwhile, the Indians were strongly against their decision to force them off their land, they made an attempt to prevent the act from affecting them. Unfortunately, the Congress was successful in forcing the Indians from their land to Oklahoma. As the […]

Indian Removal Act of 1830

Well, speaking of the specifics of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 this law was passed by the United States Congress, and it was signed by President Andrew Jackson. From previous readings I saw that George Washington also had a strong input about Native Americans being a problem, and agreed with President Andrew Jackson to extract their land. George Washington wanted to civilize the Natives by changing their beliefs in life, and converting them over to Christianity. Therefore the Removal […]

Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson

In this essay i will be ecnologing key features about two of our presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. All of their faults and things they went through during their presidency. There big achievements and how they contributed to our nation,if they even did? Hopefully you will learn as much as i did. Thomas jefferson was our 3rd presidents as you probably already knew.His 4 year term was from 1801-1809.He was born in virginia in 1743 and he became vice […]

Andrew Jackson’s and Thomas Jefferson Presidency

In the Following essay i will be discussing about thomas jefferson and andrew jackson’s presidency.The challenges they faced, along with the achievements they accomplished and the comparisons of them both,following that who in my opinion was the most successful president and why. Thomas Jefferson’s Presidency. Thomas jefferson, born april 13 1743,won the election of 1800.Became president in the following year which was 1801.He was the third president of the United states.During the course of his presidency he thought that “the […]

Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears

On December 6th, 1830, President Andrew Jackson addressed the members of Congress regarding the Indian Removal Act. He began his speech: “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 white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation. Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed […]

The Effects of Colonization on Native Americans

Though European travelers and settlers referred to the Americas as “the new world”, there was nothing new about the lands they had “discovered”. For thousands of years, Native people roamed the lands freely in the form of hundreds of different tribes. They built communities, practiced their own religions, spoke their own languages, and lived their own lives, uninterrupted. That all changed the day Columbus landed on San Salvador, October 12, 1492: “Columbus mistakenly assumed that they must be near the […]

Controversies Durong Andrew Jackson Presidency

I have chosen to write about the controversies before, during and after the Andrew Jackson presidential elections in the United States from 1824 - 1832. This period was considered to be unique in American history because Jackson was considered by many to be the first “non elitist” to be elected to the nation’s highest office. My search for primary sources on this topic for has been effective and wide reaching in scope. Ultimately, many historians come down to three questions […]

Andrew Jackson – Presidency, Facts & Trail of Tears

Think back into U.S. history the crossing of paths between Andrew Jackson and his role in the Indian Removal Act. There have been many historical events that have impacted American history, more importantly between two groups of people directly the white man and the removal of the Native Indians. The American people at the time wanted the lands of the Natives to grow additional settlements for american citizens. Andrew Jackson who spent the majority of his military career fighting against […]

Internet Project: Trail of Tears

Trail of Tears Westward Expansion is a key part of how the United States became what it is today. However, the story getting here is not all sunshine and roses and Westward Expansion effected the lives of many Native Americans. The story of what happened during Westward Expansion is still controversial in society today. The facts and statistics of this event would cause any logical person to see that this story is full of more negatives than positives. Native Americans […]

The Treaty of Indian New Echota

Introduction The 18th and 19th centuries saw the population of Georgia grow by six folds. Westerners were beginning to press on the Indian settlers, which led to the eruption of many conflicts. Europeans and Americans continued to invade the American-Indian land forcing the Cherokee India’s and the Creek Indians to the periphery. Towards 1825, almost the entire Lower Creek had been displaced from Georgia following the signing of the Treaty of Indian Springs. By the year 1827, the whole Cleek […]

Andrew Jackson and Policies for ‘Common Man’

Since the founding of the Constitution, the leaders of the U.S. had kept the power of the federal government over local governments. However, during the 1820s and 1830s, the tide turned with Andrew Jackson. Followers of Andrew Jackson believed they were the preservers of the constitution and used it to protect state’s rights. Their policies were aimed at the "common man" and went out of the way to bring individual liberties to those people. Jackson himself had a humble upbringing […]

Comparison of Jackson’s and Jefferson’s Presidency

The summary of Andrew Jackson's and Thomas Jefferson's presidency and how they were different,alike and what challenges they faced during their time Thomas jefferson saw his election as a turning point in his presidency. As president he had always dreamed of buying louisiana territory.He also set out to change the size of the army and to help government funds.A few years later after talking or negotiating with Napoleon Bonaparte offered to sell louisiana to Jefferson. Andrew Jackson before becoming president he […]

Thomas Jefferson V. Andrew Jackson

In this paper we will discuss the differences of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson during their presidency,challenges, and accomplishments. Thomas Jefferson was the 3rd president of the United States.Thomas Jefferson was president from 1801-1809 and Vice President from 1797-1801. John Adams lost the 1800 election to Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson saw his election as a turning point. He wanted to reduce the size of the army,and end naval expansion, and lower the government cost. Thomas Jefferson was a democratic-republican so […]

Who was Andrew Jackson?

Mister Andrew Jackson he has been the 7th President of the United States and unfortunately he has lost his battle to Tuberculosis. He was born on the 15th of March of 1767 in the state of North Carolina. Mister Jackson participated in the War of Independence, in which he was taken as a prisoner in 1781. While serving in the military he earned a general position that helped win the war against the British. Moreover, he studied law at Salisbury, […]

Review on the Native Americans’ History

From 1492, up until the late 19th century European settlers were determined have American Indian land for theirs to keep. In an effort for the natives to cooperate with American culture, they were regularly encouraged to convert to Christianity, or learn to speak English, and sometimes even adopt European practices such as ownership of African slaves. The idea of the Removal Act was accepted by the settlers in the south, President Jackson was hopeful that the removal of the tribes […]

Thomas Jefferson : Achievements on the U.S.

Thomas Jefferson in his presidency showed that he couldn't handle Britain when they stole our men from right in front of our noses. Jefferson thought that reducing the Army, end Naval expansion ,and lowering government cost would be good ideas for the U.S well not really if you ask me. The Louisiana purchase of 1803 is a good decision Jefferson did considering it multiplied the size of the nation. He also sent a exposition to the newly purchased land AKA […]

Andrew Jackson Biography

Andrew Jackson was a man of the people. He was born in the back woods of Tennessee in a wooden cabin. At a very young age he was left as an orphan. He helped soldiers fight. At a young age he was a troublemaker. Jackson served in the years of 1829-1837. When he served there was a lot of question about if he was democratic or not. Even though he was not the greatest president he had still democratic thoughts. […]

About the Trail of Tears

After the American Revolution, and the creation of the United States, the Native Americans were thought of as a separate nation within a sovereign country even though they wanted a peaceful coexistence with the white settlers. Eventually the white settlers became more concerned with the resources that the Native Americans sat on, then with the people themselves. This American greed led to the formation of events that led to the Trail of Tears. During the time of the Trail of […]

The Human Rights of Native Americans

Introduction: A natural right is something every man, woman, and child is born with and can never be taken away. Every person being born with rights has the obligation to pursue obtaining them through entrusting a body of government or authority to protect those rights(Locke). Rights to safety and freedom have developed as basic human rights through history so that people have freedom from an oppressive body and safety to ensure the quality of life. The human rights of Native […]

Were Andrew Jackson’s Policies “Good for the Economy”?

I would say that Andrew Jackson’s policy was good for the development of the United States because of a variety of reasons. He stood up for the lower class of the United States, which represented the majority of the population, and was very under-represented in government. Although some parts of his policy, like the Indian Removal Act, are rather questionable, strictly speaking of whether or not his policy was good for the development of the country, the pros outweigh the […]

The Impact of Native American Relocation in the United States of America

During the 19th Century A Good Indian is a Dead Indian! This is how many white Americans felt in the 1800s when greed and racial prejudice forced the relocation of Native Americans. The Trail of Tears refers to the forceful relocation of the Native American communities from the South Eastern regions of the United States as a result of the Indian Removal Act in the year 1830. In the year 1838, the Cherokee community was forced to surrender its land […]

A Lifetime of Injustice for the Native Americans under American Colonization

In 1830, the Indian Removal Act was passed, and President Andrew Jackson began negotiations to acquire native land and move the Indians to the west. From 1838 to 1839, Cherokee and Choctaw natives were forced to march 1,000 miles to present-day Oklahoma in what is called the Trail of Tears. While traveling, several thousand Native Americans died and many were mistreated. Since the start of American colonization, the Cherokee and Choctaw Indians, among other tribes, faced numerous hardships. Research demonstrates […]

Life Way of Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson lived in his home called “The Hermitage” in Tennessee. Some people believed that Andrew Jackson was the best President since the Founding Fathers. Jackson was a very controversial President. His opinion on Native American removal from their own lands and African American slaves is still controversial to this day.  Jackson’s parents immigrated to the Carolinas in the 1760’s from Ireland. Jackson never met his father. Andrew Jackson’s father died while his mother was pregnant with him. Jackson grew […]

Andrew Jackson’s Role of Dueling

Dueling in the life of Andrew Jackson was based on honor. Honor was Jacksons trademark and what his mother had raised him to believe was most important to a man. He was known for his thin-skin and violent pride. Andrew Jackson challenged many people throughout history to duels based on petty grievances or things that he thought were outright slander to his character. Despite his thin-skin and prideful attitude, he had a code of honor that he was bound to abide. […]

The Seminole Tribe

Later in the 1830s, Jackson became the President of the United States, and he pushed through Congress the Indian Removal Act. This was to move Indians out of the Southeast and use the opened land for the settlers, also for the military enforcement policy to increase. This policy began in 1835 and those 7 years were tragic in US Indian history in the relations east of the Mississippi River. This was also known in history as the Second Seminole War. […]

Facts about Presidency of Andrew Jackson

Andrew Jackson and the Second Bank of the United States: Andrew Jackson was an American soldier and who served as the seventh president of the United States. In 1833, President Jackson announced that the government would no longer use the Second Bank of the United States, the country's national bank. The national bank was created by George Washington and Alexander Hamilton in the 1700s to serve as a central repository for federal funds. When the Civil War ended, the federal […]

The Presidency of Andrew Jackson Essay

Andrew Jackson was the first president that came from a Western state. He was born in 1828 along the border of the Carolinas. Jackson's father was killed in a farm accident before Jackson was born, so his mother had to raise him by herself and earn money as a housekeeper. Jackson and his brothers joined the side of the Americans in the Revolutionary War. After his mother died of cholera, Jackson started to despise the British. With all of these […]

Additional Example Essays

• Crime and the Why
• Driving While Intoxicated Persuasive Essay
• Jeffrey Dahmer vs Ted Bundy: Nature vs. Nurture
• Analysis of Letter from Birmingham Jail
• The Importance of Professional Bearing in the Military
• Rosa Parks Vs. Harriet Tubman
• The Oppression And Privilege
• Enlightenment Ideas Reflected in the Declaration of Independence
• Charles Luther Manson: Unraveling the Enigma of a Disturbed Mind
• Compare And Contrast In WW1 And WW2
• Followership and Servant Leadership
• The Mental Health Stigma

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

The Indian Removal

The Indian removal became federal law in 1830. Congress passed it. It authorized the forced removal of native American tribes from their ancestral land in the United States, west of the Mississippi river. The law permitted the president to give public lands to the Indians living in the east in exchange for their lands in the west (Foreman, 1953). The Indian removal act was headed by president Andrew Jackson who believed it was necessary to relocate Indians to land for economic development. He viewed the native Americans as an obstacle to the expansion and success of the united states. He also believed that Native Americans could not coexist with the white settlers.

The government provided them with lads in southeastern America, currently called Oklahoma. They were relocated with a promise of government support and peaceful eviction and relocation but in reality. The process was brutal and traumatic. Even though many Indians obliged and left their ancestral lands peacefully, the Cherokee tribe did not go without a fight. This caused the death of thousands of them in what was labeled the trail of tears (Stuirgis, 2007).

One of the strongest arguments that the author has presented on the removal of the Indian act was the notion that it was necessary to protect the white settlers who were moving into the native American lands. The more the white settlers arrived at the lands, the more the conflict would erupt between the groups. It was wise for the government to remove the Indians from the lands and resettle them elsewhere to avoid bloodshed. Even though this removal could have been seen as traumatic and brutal, it was for the betterment of the nation’s future. As the say goes, the nation is bigger than an individual. The native Americans were sitting on productive lands, but they were not making maximum use of it. The white settlers had plans to maximize land use to boost production and help grow the country’s GDP. The settlers planned to set up factories and cultivate the lands on a large-scale basis.

However, removing the Indians’ acts had more flaws than strengths. One of the major flaws is that the removal of the Indians was based on the assumption that the community was inferior and could not use their ancestral lands. They were viewed as individuals incapable of adapting to the changes in the world during the period. This assumption was demeaning, offensive, and deeply racist. It led to the death and suffering of several native americans. Many suffered as the land the government gave them was unproductive, leading to hunger. Many were unable to adapt to their new home. Every human can adapt to the changes in the world given the opportunity and resources necessary.

Another flaw of the argument in the removal of the Indians’ reading was the nature at which they were evacuated from their ancestral home. Most of them were dragged out of their homes at gunpoint. The scenes were inhumane and traumatizing to the community. Many Indians died during the relocation due to the brutal nature of their eviction. Additionally, they were given cheap land to theirs, and the government never offered them much support.

I am afraid I have to disagree with the way the Indians were removed from the lands they have lived in for centuries. The racism involved in the eviction and the way they were deemed inferior was an obstacle to the nation’s development. The government should have looked for an alternative approach to removing the Indians, such as seeking peaceful negotiations on how the Indians could peacefully coexist with the white settlers. The settlers could have set up factories and farms and employed the Indians to provide labor; that could have been a win-win situation for both, and nobody could have died or suffered.

Foreman, G. (1953).  Indian removal: The emigration of the five civilized tribes of Indians  (Vol. 2). University of Oklahoma Press.

Sturgis, A. H. (2007).  The trail of tears and Indian removal . Greenwood Publishing Group.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Paper on the leadership themes of the old testament in the bible, the book of revelation, the extent to which the discipline of ethnomusicology has shifted since its inception, mary rowlandson’s captivity narrative, non-textual primary source analysis of school begins cartoon (1899), to compare and contrast two works that address the same theme and to argue which work more effectively engages the theme, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

On Indian Removal

27 pages • 54 minutes read

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Essay Analysis

Key Figures

Index of Terms

Literary Devices

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Discussion Questions

Summary and Study Guide

Summary: “on indian removal”.

The speech “On Indian Removal” by Andrew Jackson was initially delivered to the United States Congress on December 6, 1830. Jackson, a military hero in the War of 1812, is renowned as the “people’s president” because of his creation of the Democratic Party, his dissolution of the Second United States National Bank, and policies perceived as supporting the common citizen’s right to pursue liberty and freedom. Among the latter was Jackson’s support of westward expansion and “Manifest Destiny”—the idea that the US was divinely ordained to spread “civilization” across the continent. As part of this agenda, Jackson supported the displacement of Indigenous peoples from their lands, culminating in the “Trail of Tears”: the forced relocation of the Cherokee, Muscogee, Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw, resulting in much violence and death. He initiated this move with the Indian Removal Act of 1830. His speech in support of the legislation explores the themes of The Expansion of American Culture , Savagery Versus Civilization , and Divisions Within America .

This study guide refers to the copy of the speech from the National Archives Records of the United States Senate, 1789-1990, citing by paragraph.

Content Warning : The source material displays racial and ethnic prejudice and promotes ethnic cleansing.

Referring to the last 30 years of US policy towards Indigenous Americans as “benevolent,” Jackson claims that those policies are now close to attaining their goal. He notes that “two important tribes” have agreed to relocation (1), and he believes others will recognize the supposed advantages of this decision and follow suit.

Jackson argues that the displacement of Indigenous Americans will benefit all parties—particularly the tribes. He contends that the United States’s financial gains are secondary to other benefits, including reduced conflict between the state and federal governments over issues relating to Indigenous Americans. He further argues that the fertile and strategic lands currently occupied by “a few savage hunters” will flourish once populated by “civilized” people (2). These people—white Americans—will develop those regions’ culture and economy while repelling potential threats to the newly settled lands. Finally, Indigenous Americans will be able to govern themselves under their “rude institutions,” and this separation from white Americans may halt their decline. Jackson believes they may even come to embrace Christianity and other aspects of “civilization.”

Jackson questions what “good man” would prefer to leave land undeveloped and (he claims) largely uninhabited when it could boast cities and farms, citing “the blessings of liberty, civilization, and religion” that come with life in the US (3). Furthermore, he says the policy he is defending is in line with earlier government policy and merely accelerates a migration that is already occurring. Jackson insists that the government will pay a fair price for the southern and western territories currently in question and will even subsidize the relocation of the tribes. He acknowledges the pain and suffering forced displacement will cause Indigenous Americans but says that their experience of leaving their homes will be no different than that of many white Americans: In fact, it is the American way to bravely seek new and unknown places to make a life for oneself. Jackson contends that many white Americans would be happy to have the government pay for such a relocation and questions whether Indigenous Americans can be any more attached to their homelands than these Christian settlers.

Ultimately, Jackson concludes that the Indian Removal Act is “not only liberal, but generous” (5). Jackson argues that as Indigenous Americans who do not relocate must face either assimilation or extinction, the prospect of moving at the US government’s expense should be an attractive one. 

Featured Collections

Books on U.S. History

View Collection

Colonialism & Postcolonialism

Nation & Nationalism

Politics & Government

Explore the Constitution

The constitution.

• Read the Full Text

Dive Deeper

Constitution 101 course.

• The Drafting Table
• Supreme Court Cases Library
• Founders' Library
• Constitutional Rights: Origins & Travels

Start your constitutional learning journey

• News & Debate Overview
• Constitution Daily Blog
• America's Town Hall Programs
• Special Projects
• Media Library

America’s Town Hall

Watch videos of recent programs.

• Education Overview

Constitution 101 Curriculum

• Classroom Resources by Topic
• Classroom Resources Library
• Live Online Events
• Professional Learning Opportunities
• Constitution Day Resources

Explore our new 15-unit high school curriculum.

• Explore the Museum
• Plan Your Visit
• Exhibits & Programs
• Field Trips & Group Visits
• Host Your Event
• Buy Tickets

New exhibit

The first amendment, historic document, indian removal act (1830).

Congress | 1830

Signed into law on May 28, 1830, by United States President Andrew Jackson, the Removal Act authorized the president to negotiate with Native American tribes for federal territory west of the Mississippi River in exchange for Indian lands within existing state borders. Although some tribes accepted the Act, others such as the Cherokees resisted. During the Fall and Winter of 1838-39, the Cherokee were forcibly removed by the United States government in a march that later became known as the Trail of Tears.

Selected by

Laura F. Edwards

Class of 1921 Bicentennial Professor in the History of American Law and Liberty, and Professor of History at Princeton University

E. Claiborne Robins Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Richmond

CHAP. CXLVIII. - An Act to provide for an exchange of lands with the Indians residing in any of the states or territories, and for their removal west of the river Mississippi.

            Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled , That it shall and may be lawful for the President of the United States to cause so much of any territory belonging to the United States, west of the river Mississippi, not included in any state or organized territory, and to which the Indian title has been extinguished, as he may judge necessary, to be divided into a suitable number of districts, for the reception of such tribes or nations of Indians as may choose to exchange the lands where they now reside, and remove there; and to cause each of said districts to be so described by natural or artificial marks, as to be easily distinguished from every other.

            SEC. 2. And be it further enacted , That it shall and may be lawful for the President to exchange any or all of such districts, so to be laid off and described, with any tribe or nation of Indians now residing within the limits of any of the states or territories, and with which the United States have existing treaties, for the whole or any part or portion of the territory claimed and occupied by such tribe or nation, within the bounds of any one or more of the states or territories, where the land claimed and occupied by the Indians, is owned by the United States, or the United States are bound to the state within which it lies to extinguish the Indian claim thereto.

            SEC. 3. And be it further enacted , That in the making of any such exchange or exchanges, it shall and may be lawful for the President solemnly to assure the tribe or nation with which the exchange is made, that the United States will forever secure and guaranty to them, and their heirs or successors, the country so exchanged with them; and if they prefer it, that the United States will cause a patent or grant to be made and executed to them for the same: Provided always , That such lands shall revert to the United States, if the Indians become extinct, or abandon the same.

APPROVED, May 28, 1830.

Explore the full document

Modal title.

Modal body text goes here.

Share with Students