Suite101

The Indian Removal Act Examined

Land Speculation and The Trail of Tears

© Jeffrey R Gudzune

Oct 6, 2007
Having, through a variety of methods, convinced tribal leaders to cede their lands, the U.S. government enacted a policy of mass removal to a new frontier...Oklahoma.

While their countrymen resettled in Florida among the Seminole, the Creek, who remained in their former territory, faced an uncertain future at the hands of the American government. Their lives were made even more complicated when the man who had been an ally to some of them, Andrew Jackson, became President of the United States. In 1830, Jackson signed the Indian Removal Act, effectively voiding all indigenous land claims with respect to the five tribes of the east—Cherokee, Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole. The act further provided for their resettlement into a designated Indian Territory, located in present day Oklahoma. Despite legal protests from tribal leaders, Jackson ordered the removal of these tribes—by military force if necessary. The Cherokee Nation, which engaged in a long border dispute with Georgia, continued its legal efforts and even scored a significant victory in 1832 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that the individual states had no jurisdiction within tribal lands. Jackson, who argued that Indian removal was in the national interest, ignored the ruling. The result would be known as the Trail of Tears.

For Jackson, the removal of the eastern tribes was more than just a matter of internal security—he also had a personal financial stake in some of the territory in question. With each treaty signed by a Native American state, white investors were able to purchase the ceded lands for their own use. Jackson saw no conflict in partaking in this massive buyout. After nearly sparking a war with Spain, the United States managed to acquire Florida in 1819. Jackson was appointed governor of the newly annexed territory in 1821. Throughout this experience, Jackson urged a policy of removal of Indian tribes and encouraged white investment. This was now possible with the Indian Removal Act.

Many tribal leaders contended that the various treaties that assisted with the enforcement of the provisions of the Indian Removal Act were not representative of the will of the individual tribes. By and large this was true, as many of the treaties ceding land in the years preceding the act were signed by chiefs who were either bribed or threatened. Additionally, the five tribes outlined in the removal act claimed that these documents were signed by individual leaders and not duly empowered representatives of the nations themselves. This was the argument of Principal Chief John Ross, the elected leader of the Cherokee Nation, who claimed that regional (or, civil) chiefs did not have the authority to speak for the entire nation. Similar claims were put forward by leaders of the Chickasaw and Choctaw nations.

In the case of the Choctaw Nation, American agents brokered deals with dozens of minor chiefs in the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek and then claimed that this document represented the will of entire nation. They were the first to be removed over a period of four years. Beginning in 1831, the U.S. Army escorted individual Choctaw communities westward and resettled them in Oklahoma. It is estimated that nearly one-fourth of the refugees perished during their relocation. In 1832, the Cherokee were relocated, followed by the Seminole in 1835. In 1836, the Creek endured this experience, and in 1837, the Chickasaw had to leave their lands. The United States government provided funding to provision the army escort but did not supply enough blankets and food for the refugee population. Through the harsh winters of 1831 to 1834, hundreds of Choctaw died. Similar casualty figures were recorded among the Cherokee, Creek, and Seminole. It was this last nation that put up the most determined resistance in the Second Seminole War (1835-1842).

Reference:

Mark C Carnes, Ed, U.S. History. (New York: MacMillan Library Reference, 1996).

Kenneth C. Davis, Don’t Know Much About History. (New York: Harper-Collins Publishers, 2003).

Nelson Klose and Robert F. Jones, United States History: To 1877. (Hauppauge: Barron’s Educational Services, Inc., 1994).

Gilbert Legay, Atlas of Indians. (Hauppage: Barron’s Educational Services, Inc., 1995)

James M. McPherson, Ed., “To the Best of My Ability”: The American Presidents. (London: Dorling-Kidersley, 2000).


The copyright of the article The Indian Removal Act Examined in Native American/First Nations History is owned by Jeffrey R Gudzune. Permission to republish The Indian Removal Act Examined in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.




Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo