Andrew Jackson's Argumentative Analysis

The peace between the Native Americans and the Europeans settlers did not last very long due to years of mistrust and fighting for control of land both laid claim to. Tensions reached a boiling point during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Jackson became a leading advocate for the removal of Native Americans from their lands. In his first and second annual address to Congress, Andrew Jackson presented his controversial stance on forcing the Native Americans out of United States territory. His argument gained some support, but was met with criticism from those siding against his policy. Both sides offered their legal and moral arguments on the subject of Indian removal, but those against the policy made the better argument. Andrew Jackson …show more content…
He asked Congress to consider setting aside lands west of the Mississippi River for the Native American to use as they wish. It was there, Jackson asserted, the Native Americans “may be secured in the enjoyment of governments of their own choice, subject to no other control from the United States.” It also seemed like Jackson did not want to make this change forcefully and made it appear as if the Native Americans could eventually become more civilized on the other side of the Mississippi. However, Jackson made it clear that if the Native Americans did intend to live inside United States territory; they must adhere to the states’ …show more content…
The Cherokee Nation also had their chance to voice their stance to Congress. They initially asked why it has come to the idea of removing them to another location they are unfamiliar with. The Cherokees believed they initiated no treaty with the United States to relinquish the rights to their lands. Finally, they insisted if their interpretations of treaties made with the United States are incorrect; then they were