Jaslynn Luper

American Civilization
Indian Removal Paper

Part A

Cherokee Indian Removal was a large part of the Trail of Tears.
The Trail of Tears exchanged Native American land in the east for lands
west of the Mississippi. This Indian Removal refers to the forced
relocation of the Cherokee Nation from their lands in Georgia,
Tennessee, Alabama, and North Carolina to the Indian Territory (now
Oklahoma) between 1838 and 1839. Soldiers rounded up Cherokees in
Georgia on May 26, 1838, and ten days later began the same operation
in Tennessee, Alabama, and North Carolina. An estimated 17,000
Cherokees (along with about 2,000 black slaves owned by wealthy
Cherokees) were removed from their homes at gunpoint and were lead
to camps in wagons before being sent to the west. This forced relocation
resulted in the deaths of an estimated 4,000 Cherokee Indians.
In 1823 the Supreme Court handed down a decision, which stated,
Indians could occupy lands within the United States, but could not hold
title to those lands. This was because their "right of occupancy" was
subordinate to the United States' "right of discovery." In response to
the great threat this posed, the Creeks, Cherokee, and Chicasaw
instituted policies of restricting land sales to the government. They
wanted to protect what remained of their land before it was too late. In
1830, just a year after taking office, Jackson pushed a new piece of
legislation called the "Indian Removal Act" through both houses of
Congress. It gave the president power to negotiate removal treaties with
Indian tribes living east of the Mississippi. Under these treaties, the
Indians were to give up their lands east of the Mississippi in exchange
for lands to the west. Those wishing to remain in the east would become
citizens of their home state. This act affected not only the southeastern
nations, but also many others further north. The removal was supposed
to be voluntary and nonviolent, and it was that way for the tribes that
agreed to the conditions. But the southeastern nations resisted, and
Jackson forced them to leave. Jackson's attitude toward Native
Americans was paternalistic and patronizing -- he described them as
children in need of guidance.
In the 1831 Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia case, Supreme Court
Justice John Marshall ruled that Georgia did not have the right to
remove the Indian tribes from their land. However, Andrew Jackson
ignored the decision and declared, Justice Marshall has made his
decision. Let him enforce it. Native Americans suffered from exposure,
disease, and starvation, what part of this is just? Kicking somebody off
his or her land just to expand your wealth is very unjustified.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, an American essayist, lecturer, poet,
and believer of individuality and freedom of the people, wrote a letter to
Jacksons successor, President Martin Van Buren, urging him not to
inflict so vast an outrage upon the Cherokee Nation. He felt that it was
a sham treaty to relocate the Cherokee Indians. A few hundred people
only signed this treaty, where as the protest letter was signed by 15,668
Cherokees. Emerson made a plea to the president with questions that
struck at the core of American Liberty: Will it lie? Will it kill? He fought
for liberty and against an unfair treaty, which led to one of the darkest
moments in historyThe Trail of Tears.
An argument that stood out to me by Emerson, was when he
stated In common with the great body of the American people, we have
witnessed with sympathy the painful labors of these red men to redeem
their own race from the doom of eternal inferiority, and to borrow and
domesticate in the tribe the acts and customs of the Caucasian race.
With this, he was trying to help Buren understand that they deserved
the right to be there just as much as the Americans did. He even says
that these Cherokees were their colleges, and they were in their schools.
Forcefully relocating them would be a needless act of terror. Emerson
also states it is not to be doubted that it is the good pleasure and the
understanding of all humane persons in the Republic, of the men and
the matrons sitting in the thriving independent families all over the
land, that they shall be duly cared for; that they shall taste justice and
love from all to whom we have delegated the office of dealing with
them. He wants to make his point clear, that The Cherokees have every
right to stay in their own land. Taking it from them us unfair and
inhumane.
He states that the people that disagree with the removal feel
distrust in all hopes that the government would change their minds.
Emersons letter agrees with John Rosss letter. John Ross also
states his disagreement with the Indian Removal Act. Ross states, to
make bargain and sale of our rights, our possessions, and our common
country. They both agree that the Cherokees and the whites have the
same rights as one another, and to take that away against consent would
be injustice. He also states that they are being stripped of every
attribute of freedom and eligibility for legal self-defense. He is trying to
say that everything is being taken away with a blink of an eye. Taking
your land from you, on top of your property, privacy, and family is not
the way to settle anything.
The rhetoric within these letters is very persuasive in my opinion.
They both have very understandable feelings and arguments. Both
portrayed meaningful and heartfelt explanations in which I could agree
with. Through out this whole tragedy, as I read and researched many
things, I can only see one side. And what happened to these innocent
men, women, and children, was unbelievable. All of this just to gain
wealth and power? How is that okay to do to your fellow man and his
family? The Cherokee Indians had plenty of rights to live in their own
land. Not to mention I feel that they were very civil in the beginning
before any decision was made.

Part B

Winfield Scotts ultimatum was very straightforward on what was
going to be done. Reading his ultimatum and then turning to read John
Burnetts narrative on how events actually played out, was very
unsettling. Scott made everything sound as if through out the removal,
everyone would be treated humanely. Then there is the ultimatum,
which states soldiers are as kind-hearted, as brave, and the desire of
every one of us is to execute our painful duty in mercy. Burnett being
the soldier he was in the American army was forced to help forcefully
relocate the Cherokee Indians. He goes on to explain how he witnessed
helpless Cherokees be drug from their homes with nothing but the
clothes on their backs. Like cattle, they were shoved into 645 wagons.
He explains the sadness and solemnity of that horrible site. He was
forced to stand there and witness many Indians die due to the freezing
temperatures, ill treatment, exposure, and illnesses that surrounded the
camps. Burnett describes his lash he received on his face from Ben
McDonal for trying to defend a Cherokee that was being tortured with a
whip. Through out these very long trips getting the Indians to the
camps, he became acquainted with many of the Cherokee Indians. He
not only learned how to speak their language, but also helped them in
their time of need. He states in his letter, I can truthfully say that I did
my best for them when they certainly did need a friend. Twenty-five
years after the removal I still lived in their memory as "the soldier that
was good to us".