Indian Removal Policy
D.E. US History
12-10-13
Indian Removal Policy Land disputes and law jurisdiction cases had begun to appear quite frequently in the United States Supreme Court during the time the Indian Policy was put into effect after the war. Congress had to address the situation so they came up with the Indian Policy. It was concluded that, “discovery also gave the discoverer the exclusive right to extinguish Indian title either by purchase or by conquest. Natives were recognized only as temporary occupants of the land, and not as owners (Learn NC). The decision to move the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River, decided by the Jackson administration, was more of a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790’s. There were several moral aspects of moving the Indians that were brought up during this time. The Secretary of War, William H. Crawford, said, “Intrusions upon the lands of the friendly Indian tribes, is not only a violation of the laws, but in direct opposition to the policy of government towards its savage neighbors…” while he was talking to some military commanders (Document G). He was trying to get the point across that it was morally wrong to remove the Indians from the lands that they have lived on for so long, especially since they had not done anything to justify the actions that the American Government were attempting to take against them. There was a collection of photographs from the Georgia Historical Society that contained a picture of the Vann House, built by James Vann who was a Cherokee leader of mixed blood. His estate was beautiful and very well built. It showed the intelligence of the Indians and that they were not all primitive like some would believe (Document L). There were many practical concerns that were evaluated in deciding whether or not to move the Indians off their land. One concern was the fact that the Indians were a smart, advanced culture that was constantly improving. Henry
12-10-13
Indian Removal Policy Land disputes and law jurisdiction cases had begun to appear quite frequently in the United States Supreme Court during the time the Indian Policy was put into effect after the war. Congress had to address the situation so they came up with the Indian Policy. It was concluded that, “discovery also gave the discoverer the exclusive right to extinguish Indian title either by purchase or by conquest. Natives were recognized only as temporary occupants of the land, and not as owners (Learn NC). The decision to move the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River, decided by the Jackson administration, was more of a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790’s. There were several moral aspects of moving the Indians that were brought up during this time. The Secretary of War, William H. Crawford, said, “Intrusions upon the lands of the friendly Indian tribes, is not only a violation of the laws, but in direct opposition to the policy of government towards its savage neighbors…” while he was talking to some military commanders (Document G). He was trying to get the point across that it was morally wrong to remove the Indians from the lands that they have lived on for so long, especially since they had not done anything to justify the actions that the American Government were attempting to take against them. There was a collection of photographs from the Georgia Historical Society that contained a picture of the Vann House, built by James Vann who was a Cherokee leader of mixed blood. His estate was beautiful and very well built. It showed the intelligence of the Indians and that they were not all primitive like some would believe (Document L). There were many practical concerns that were evaluated in deciding whether or not to move the Indians off their land. One concern was the fact that the Indians were a smart, advanced culture that was constantly improving. Henry