While claiming to have acted for the benefit of native populations, Andrew Jackson publicly pursued an agenda that evolved into an effort to undercut their society. Jackson advocated a policy that called for the relocation of all Indian tribes that hindered American expansion. Those few communities that chose to remain within the borders of the United States were to be absorbed into the states themselves. The Indian Removal Act gave him this power. This controversial legislation authorized the President to seek the removal of all tribes situated along the borders of the United States. The Indian Removal Act was worded like a diplomatic agreement between sovereign governments and contained no intimation of the devastating chain of events it would set in motion. The president was authorized to exchange federally managed territory in the western expanse for Indian territory in the east. Native tribes were to be given time to relocate and they would be aided in their relocation effort by federal troops. $500,000 was appropriated to pursue this end. On the surface, the Indian Removal Act read like a promise of fair treatment. When implemented, however, this legislation was far less equitable.
Jackson’s Push for Removal
President Andrew Jackson argued that passage of the Indian Removal Act would lessen tensions between settlers and Indian nations in proximity to the United States. The federal government had mandated a system of equal economic exchange and prohibited settlement on native land since the passage of the Trade and Intercourse Act. However, the individual states sought to absorb these lands for settlement purposes and found themselves clashing with both federal and tribal governments. Jackson believed that continual conflict over borders and settlement would inevitably destroy Indian civilization. Relocating Indian tribes to the west would prevent such conflicts and allow them to “pursue happiness in their own way and under their own rude institutions.” The president argued that it was the responsibility of the United States to “retard the progress of decay,” in the hopes that Indian tribes would one day “cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community.” This was underlying emotion behind the president’s advocacy of the Indian Removal Act.
Bitter Debate
Despite the positive rhetoric, there were those who saw a more sinister motive underscoring the creation of the Indian Removal Act. Many members of Congress rose to speak in opposition to the measure. Senator Theodore Frelinghuysen condemned the Indian Removal Act as the product of an oppressive government that would one day regret the “encroachments upon the sacred privileges of our Indian neighbors.” Congressman David Crockett of Tennessee also rose in opposition to this legislation. Missionaries, who for years had been surreptitiously trying to alter Indian society with their efforts to convert them en masse, found themselves preaching against removal. One religious leader even went so far as to urge members of Congress to vote against the bill on moral grounds. Jackson’s powerful influence reached far into the House and Senate and the Indian Removal Act was passed by a single vote in May of 1830.
Sources:
Mark M. Boatner III, Encyclopedia of the American Revolution. (Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 1994).
Mark C Carnes, Ed. U.S. History. (New York: MacMillan Library Reference, 1998).
Marilyn Miller and Martin Faux, American History Desk Reference. (New York: MacMillan, 1997).
Carl Waldman, Atlas of the North American Indian. (New York: Checkmark Books, 2000).
Carl Waldman, Encyclopedia of Native Tribes. (New York: Checkmark Books, 2006).
 |
