It was said that President Andrew Jackson was looking in the best interest of U.S. citizens and moved the indians to help keep from conflicts that could possibly lead to war from arising yet again between the United States and the Native Americans or that some Native tribes were just too violent and were seen as a threat by U.S. citizens. It seemed like Americans and Native Americans could not blend and live together peacefully and that is also a said reason why the Trail of Tears…
“Inskeep, Steve. Jacksonland: President Andrew Jackson, Cherokee Chief John Ross, and a Great American Land Grab. Penguin Group USA, 2016” In Jacksonland by Steve Inskeep talks about the different states and different territories that were divided by the “white men “and American Indians own concepts of democracy. Inskeep interlaces together the stories of Andrew Jackson a general, president and author of the Indian removal and John Ross chief of the Cherokee.…
He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Native Americans. When it comes to Native American history, Jackson ranks right up there with the worst genocidal tyrants. Because white Southerners in the early 19th century craved the land inhabited by native tribes like the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, Creek and Cherokee, they needed the government to expel the original inhabitants so they could seize the property for themselves. Although the law only permitted voluntary and peaceful removals of natives from their land, Jackson ignored the law…
Curtis explains that initially Jackson had no quarrel with the Native Americans because they never had harmed anyone in his family, but tensions between them and other westerners influenced his views (22). As Jackson grew older his words on Native Americans grew harsher and showed how he hated them for their disorder. Later when Jackson was a military man, he took to slaughtering so many Native Americans. He did this to the Creeks who had sided with the British and attacked Fort Mims in 1813 (Curtis 49). Yet during his presidency, when tensions with the United States and the Native Americans were high, Jackson said that “Indians are subjects of the United Stated” (Curtis 71).…
Professor Daniel Feller talks in his article Andrew Jackson’s Shifting Legacy about how Andrew Jackson has received so much fame. He has not done anything as nearly significant as other presidents have, but yet he is almost always ranked in the top ten presidents. Jackson has a whole era dedicated to him, whereas other presidents simply belong to eras. Some of the main things Jackson did were that he defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans, dealt with the Nullification Crisis, had famous vetoes, and signed the Indian Removal Act. In Feller’s concluding sentence, he says that Americans will continue to argue about Jackson.…
Remini says Jackson felt that the only solution for both the Unites States and the Native tribes was that they had to be removed. This attitude towards the Indians followed him into the White house when he was elected President in 1828. Of all the things Jackson accomplished during his presidency, his Indian Removal Act was most important. Jackson finally accomplished his long thought solution to the Indian problem. Today’s historians see this a cruel act against his seemingly long term enemy.…
This action caused the Indians to suffer, and many of them died along the way. Jackson’s message to congress regarding the Indian removal explained that many Indian tribes were becoming extinct and asked congress to consider setting aside territory west of the Mississippi specially for the Indians (Doc. J). This proposal was used to solely benefit the eastern territory to benefit farmers and working men by opening up lands. Jackson benefitted himself economically at a cost, which was removing the Indians from the territory without their consent, proving his egotistical behavior. Correspondingly, responses from the Cherokee tribe verified Jackson’s injustice.…
This sought to negotiate the exchange of Indian lands in the south for new lands in American territory (Lapanskey-Werner, et al page 254). The Jackson Administration urged many Native Americans to sell their land and move out of the southern territory which a ajority did; however, the Cherokee Indians refused to move and went to the Supreme Court (Lapanskey-Werner, et al page 253). The Supreme Court eventually ruled that the Cherokee Indians be allowed to remain on their land, but Jackson decided to force them out of the southern territory, along a Trail of Tears, that ended in Oklahoma (Lapanskey-Werner, et al page 254). Many people criticized Jackson for these actions, calling them inhumane and cruel, but Andrew Jackson’s focus was for the interest and welfare of the people of United States. Even…
He mass murdered many Native Americans starting in his military career. Jackson was in charge of appropriating Creek and Cherokee lands. In the war of 1812 he, along with his troops, murdered over 800 creek warriors and afterwards led troops too murder creek women and children to exterminate the Creek Indians. On May 28th, 1830, as President of the United States, Andrew Jackson signed into law the Indian Removal Act, which led to mass death of over 4,000 Cherokees during the forced march from their land, which is now known as the Trail of Tears. The Cherokee Trail of Tears is one of many such marches leading to the death of many Native Americans.…
The Supreme Court, as Justice Madison puts it, is the Supreme interpreter of the law, and all laws that are not constitutional must be strike down. Brandeis also thinks this way. He thinks the interpreter of the law has supervisory powers. They must be impartial and not allow a citizen or government official to break the law. If citizens break the law, then the appropriate punishment applies according to the statutes; however, if the government breaks the law, then sanctions applies to uphold the integrity of the law.…
But as is shown through Jackson's history, Jackson only sought to give power to the people, to raise himself politically. He acts like the man of the people, but later becomes like a king. Others will address the fact that he helped America gain more land, and that it was impossible for the Cherokees to coexist with Americans. If people go down this road, there is no telling when they'll stop. People do not have the right to wipe out a smaller faction without a reasonable cause.…
During his presidency, Jackson supported The Indian Removal Act. The Act forced the Indians to move west of the Mississippi. The Indians believed they should not be removed from their home land, and the Cherokee sued the government. The Cherokee have won in court, and earned the right to stay at their homeland. This isn’t the case to Jackson; he still forced the Indians out to the west.…
One of the greatest developments of the 19th century was the Industrial Revolution, as it paved the way for a new way of living in America. New forms of technology and transportation contributed to the increased expansion from the established eastern cities to the western frontier. Although this expansion created many new possibilities, there was still people who felt expansion was detrimental to the nation. Between 1800 and 1855, supporters and opponents of territorial expansion influenced federal government policy by urging the government to act, or not to, on expansion debate that would affect the future of the nation. During the 1800’s, America was ready to expand but the French held control of New Orleans and the Louisiana territory,…
But this was ignored and whites continued to move into Indian Territory. It is reported that U.S president Andrew Jackson responded by saying “Well John Marshall his decision. Now let him enforce it!” Andrew Jackson did nothing to help the Indians or make things better for them. He believed the best thing for them was to move them…
As years keep passing through, new generations develop different perspectives on life. Not only does the generations play a role; but also, the typical age you are in general plays a role. For example, grandparents never grew up with technology, but now toddlers, children, and even teens have technology in their hands at any moment. The way a person was brought up, believes, and values plays a way a person looks at life. By interviewing a young adult (18-40 yrs), a middle adult (40-65 yrs), and a late adult (65+ yrs), we can analyze the different perspectives each interviewee has due to the environment, age, and outlook on life…