HistoryNet mastheadHistoryNetShop Summer Catalog

Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act

American History  | 22 comments  | Print This Post  | Email This Post

Having disposed of Ross, Jackson turned back to Schermerhorn and instructed him to renew the negotiations with the Treaty Party. With little difficulty the cleric managed to arrange a draft removal treaty signed on March 14, 1835, by Schermerhorn, John Ridge, Elias Boudinot, and a small delegation of Cherokees. After due notice the treaty was submitted to the Cherokee National Council at New Echota, Georgia, for approval and sent to the President for submission to the Senate. The draft stipulated that the Cherokees surrender to the United States all its land east of the Mississippi River for a sum of $5 million, an amount that one modern historian has called ‘unprecedented generosity.’ This cession comprised nearly 8 million acres of land in western North Carolina, northern Georgia, northeastern Alabama, and eastern Tennessee. A schedule of removal provided that the Cherokees would be resettled in the west and receive regular payments for subsistence, claims, and spoliations, and would be issued blankets, kettles, and rifles.

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to American History magazine

At approximately the same time this draft treaty was drawn up and considered at New Echota, a large delegation of Cherokee chiefs — in the desperate hope that their assembled presence would make a difference and prevent the treaty from going forward to the Senate — went to Washington and asked to speak to their Great Father. In contrast to his grudging granting of Ross’s request, Jackson was anxious to meet the delegation and give the chiefs one of his celebrated ‘talks.’

The Indians arrived at the White House at the designated hour, and Jackson treated them with marked respect, as though they really were dignitaries of a foreign nation. Yet he did not remotely say or do anything that would indicate an acceptance of their independence or sovereignty. Once the Indians had assembled they faced the President as he began his talk.

‘Brothers, I have long viewed your condition with great interest. For many years I have been acquainted with your people, and under all variety of circumstances, in peace and war. Your fathers are well known to me …. Listen to me, therefore, as your fathers have listened ….’

Jackson paused. He turned from side to side to look at and take in all the Cherokees standing around him. After a few moments he began again.

‘You are now placed in the midst of a white population …. You are now subject to the same laws which govern the citizens of Georgia and Alabama. You are liable to prosecutions for offenses, and to civil actions for a breach of any of your contracts. Most of your people are uneducated, and are liable to be brought into collision at all times with your white neighbors. Your young men are acquiring habits of intoxication. With strong passions . . . they are frequently driven to excesses which must eventually terminate in their ruin. The game has disappeared among you, and you must depend upon agriculture and the mechanic arts for support. And yet, a large portion of your people have acquired little or no property in the soil itself …. How, under these circumstances, can you live in the country you now occupy? Your condition must become worse and worse, and you will ultimately disappear, as so many tribes have done before you.’

These were his usual arguments, but he judged them essential for success.

You have not listened to me, he scolded. You went to the courts for relief. You turned away from your Great Father. And what happened? After years of litigation you received little satisfaction from the Supreme Court and succeeded in earning the enmity of many whites. ‘I have no motive, Brothers, to deceive you,’ he said. ‘I am sincerely desirous to promote your welfare. Listen to me, therefore, while I tell you that you cannot remain where you are now …. It [is] impossible that you can flourish in the midst of a civilized community. You have but one remedy within your reach. And that is to remove to the West and join your countrymen, who are already established there.’ The choice is yours. ‘May the great spirit teach you how to choose.’

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Tags: , , , , ,

HistoryNet.com Subject Locator
  1. 22 Comments to “Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act”

  2. i love history!!!!!!!!!!

    By Austin on Nov 19, 2008 at 12:49 pm

  3. i love history bcuz its very interestin

    By samantha on Jan 8, 2009 at 3:00 pm

  4. i love history cuz it is so amazing ;]

    By samantha on Jan 8, 2009 at 3:01 pm

  5. I LOVE EDWARD EVERETTTTT!

    By daddys little gurll(: on Jan 15, 2009 at 8:29 pm

  6. hate history!!!!!!!!!!
    but for me………….this artical was very helpful.(:
    To all you people who think there SO cool, to cool for school kinda kids. if ya need help in history go to historynet.com!!!!
    its VERY helpful. after this ill probably go back to being cool!!!
    haha but it helped and was VERY inspiring. Thankyou muchly(:
    this website helped(:
    -Peacce out

    ps. if you are in need of help, REMEMBER, God is always there for you. he will answer ure prayers. just need to be forgiven.
    <3 luv you kids(:

    By daddys little gurll(: on Jan 15, 2009 at 10:40 pm

  7. History revisionists have tried to make Andrew Jackson the scapegoat for the removal of the Cherokees. He did not come up with the idea on his own. The congress of the United States did after all pass this treaty. Jackson was out of office when the treaty was enforced.
    According to the article, Jackson urged Van Buren to enforce the treaty. The article stated that when the treaty was enforced, the Cherokee were forcibly removed. Looters came in and took what was left.
    That speaks volumes about the thugs the United States hires to do its dirty work. Case in point, the Cuban refugee boy that lesbian attorney general that worked for Clinton sent back to Cuba with a machine gun pointed at him.
    I am sure that is not the way that cousin Andy, I am 5th cousin related through his father’s sister Tabatha Jackson, wanted the situation to turn out.
    There were clashes amongst the settlers and the Cherokee. Jackson did not want them to be wiped out. The Whites were flowing in. The Cherokees were outnumbered. Look what those thugs did to the Cherokee. Jackson wanted to avoid that. He offered money and support and new land. Ross, who was not a full blooded Cherokee and lived like a white man with slaves, convinced the tribe to hold out even though the situation was untendable.
    I saw a movie one time, I belive it was Charlie Sheen that was supposed to go undercover and bust a lot of outlaw bikers. During one scene in the movie, he was locked up in jail with an Indian fellow. They were talking about what a lone Indian was supposed to do when surrounded by 100 whites with guns. The Indian said
    ” give the f up”.
    2000 Cherokee listened to Jackson and left for Oklahoma right away.
    I think the Indian in the movie had the right idea.

    By bbjohnson on Jan 18, 2009 at 9:37 pm

  8. This place is such a good site…i really enjoy history

    By me on Feb 19, 2009 at 1:04 am

  9. BLEH!! HISTORY!

    By jhdfjskhfame on Feb 23, 2009 at 9:42 pm

  10. woa. . . . . . luved it!!!

    By michella on Mar 5, 2009 at 1:17 pm

  11. I HATE PRESIDENT JACKSON!!!

    By Nick on Mar 14, 2009 at 12:27 pm

  12. i love andrew jackson i have been too is house it is magnificent!!!!!!!!!!!

    By patrick on Mar 16, 2009 at 9:16 am

  13. i love andrew jackson<3

    By frank on Mar 24, 2009 at 1:13 pm

  14. Great president, but a JERK!!!!!!

    By shamishka on Apr 14, 2009 at 8:39 pm

  15. WOW

    By sbfsdbfbsdf on Apr 29, 2009 at 12:11 pm

  16. last year i got a D in history and this site helped me out!now i have a 90!!!!!!!!!!andrew jackson??????I HAV NO CLUE

    By litterbox on May 5, 2009 at 10:42 am

  17. i had a C in history and the teacher didnt help me at all so thos helped me a hole lot!!

    By yolanda on May 5, 2009 at 10:43 am

  18. This helps. but i hate history.. but i got really good notes on this. woo. haha.

    By Ann. :) on May 20, 2009 at 12:37 pm

  19. i think this is just wrong

    By sharon d on May 28, 2009 at 9:11 am

  20. i have never liked history its just not my thing….but this page was really helpful.
    and who IS Andrew Jackson??

    By cheyenne sanderson(loves ira thompson) on May 28, 2009 at 1:06 pm

  21. boring but informative helped me out on mii project hooray

    By tamzgurl33 on Oct 21, 2009 at 2:28 pm

  22. cool webi site

    By tamzgurl33 on Oct 21, 2009 at 2:29 pm

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. Dec 21, 2008: Prop 8? - Page 43

Post a Comment

Please note that HistoryNet Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazines, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



SPONSORED SITES







HistoryNet Article Archives Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which of these World War I aircraft was the best fighter plane?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Get Our Daily HistoryNet Email
 
 


What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

 Get our RSS!
 Newsletter Signup

From Our Magazines

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help