Nicholas
The issues at stake between the United States Senate and Cherokee Nation is centered around land occupation. The main question is, “Does the United States government have the right to extinguish the Cherokee’s from land they occupy?” A Senate bill called for an exchange of lands with the Indians In the speech of Senator John Forsyth of Georgia states that the Cherokee are an independent Nation and their independence is guarantied by the United States. However, they still look to the government for guidance and consider themselves members of the state under the constitution.
On the other hand, Senator Peleg Sprague of Maine was against such an exchange. He states that the bill involves the question of rights and duties of the United States towards the Indians. He acknowledges that through several treaties, the Unites States has guarantied that the Cherokee will enjoy their separate existence in a peaceful community, undisturbed enjoyment of their lands, and protection of the Unites States against any encroachment of their lands. Sprague brings up a good point when he states:
“By the constitution, the fundamental compact,
Georgia has given to the United States the right to legislate, in certain
cases, over her citizens, for their benefit; for example, to organize,
arm, discipline, and call forth her militia. Can the United States
transfer this right to South Carolina, or any other sovereign?”
Thus, does the United States have the right to transfer rights of legislation in certain cases to separate states?
The legal issues at stake in this debate are numerous but it comes down to the right of government to force Indians out of their land. As a precursor to the Trail of Tears, this debate has significance in United States history because it is one of many times that the Indians (including the Cherokee) are pitted against the United States government in a fight for their land.
The first document I chose to read was President Andrew Jackson’s inaugural address from 1830. I found the address interesting because he affirms that the removal of the Indians will have great importance to the Unites States, individual states, and the Indians themselves. Furthermore, he acknowledges that the removal will end all collisions between the State and General government concerning the Indians. I also found this document to be telling because Jackson goes on to list why the Indians will benefit from the move:
1.) Separate them from white settlements.
2.) Free them from the power of the states.
3.) Enable them to pursue happiness under their own institutions.
4.) Help them become a good, civilized Christian community.
Furthermore, he states that the Indians should be happy with the deal because many people would jump at the opportunity to move west. It is evident that Jackson feels this is a generous deal that he is giving the Indians. Consequently, a major part of Jackson’s inaugural address deals with the issue of Indian Affairs so it is apparent that he placed great emphasis on Indians and the act of moving them out of their native land to land the United States government had for them in the West.
The second document I chose to read and comment on was “John Burnett's Story of the Trail of Tears.” Contrary to the report read to the troops concerning what would happen during the move, Burnett affirms that the move was a disaster. The journey to Oklahoma was painful for the Indians because they were treated poorly, causing thousands to get sick and perish. Subsequently, food, shelter, and provisions were not provided adequately for the Indians. Burnett’s story is telling because it gives us the opportunity to learn about the “Trail of Tears” from a non-Indian that was present during the journey.Kayla
John Burnettes Story of the Trail of Tears:
Once almost a member of the Cherokee tribes, John now was forced (while being in the Army) to remove these same Indians from their homes. He was the Interpreter for the Army, having learned their language at an early age. He explained the terrible conditions, the weather was terrible and some did not have shoes or blankets and up to 20 people a night were dying thanks to the cold conditions. The journey west was ended on March 26, 1839 with many casualties. John stood up for many of the Indians when the other members of the Army were being cruel to the Indians. The land was siezed and people were killed just for the gold that lie in the Cherokee territory. When the Indians were being seized many were taken straight from doing work in teh fields. Women were taken from teh home and children and their families were seperated. The elderly were poked and proded to get them to move faster. He was remembered as the soldier that was good to them. He was the only one that tried to be a friend to them and lent a hand when people were in need.
Andrew Jacksons letter to the Indians:
Andrew Jackson is very judgemental of the Indians in writing this letter. He calls their customs weird and claims that they need to clean up their drinking habits or they will be in trouble with the laws. he basically is telling them that with what they own for land that the Indians willl soon completely dissappear like their ancestors did. He says this because they are expected to get food from agriculture but none of them really own much land.
he says to them that it is basically all theri fault because they were told 18 years ago to sell thier property and move to the west, but none of them did so. So he is trying to justify why they went in thier and took everything that the Indians owned.Kerri
"We the Representatives of the people of the Cherokee Nation, in Convention assembled in order to establish justice ensure tranquility, promote our common welfare, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of liberty, acknowledging with humility and gratitude the goodness of the sovereign ruler of the Universe affording us an opportunity so favorable to the design and imploring his aid and direction in its accomplishments do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Government of the Cherokee Nation.”
“Section 2. The Cherokee Nation as laid off into eight Districts shall remain so.”
“Elections for members to the General Council for 1828 shall be held at the place of holding their several courts & at the other two precincts in each Districts which are designated by the law under which the members of this convention were elected and that the district Judges shall superintend the elections within the precinct of their respective Court Houses, and the marshalls & sheriffs to superintend the precincts which may be assigned them by the Circuit Judges of their respective Districts together with one other person who shall be appointed by the circuit Judges for each precinct within the District of their respective Circuits, and the Circuit Judges shall also appoint a Clerk to each precinct.”
“Section Every bill which shall have passed both houses of the General Council shall before it becomes a law be presented to the principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation if he approves it he shall sign it but if not he shall return it with his objections to that house in which it shall have originated who shall enter the objections at large on their journals and proceed to reconsider it if after such reconsideration two thirds of that house shall agree to pass the Bill it shall be sent together with the objection to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered and if approved of by two thirds of that house it shall become a law.”
http://www2.volstate.edu/cbucy/History%202030/Documents/Cherokee%20Constitution-Doc52.htmEmily V.
<http://neptune3.galib.uga.edu/ssp/cgi-bin/tei-natamer-idx.pl?sessionid=7f000001&type=doc&tei2id=pam013 <http://neptune3.galib.uga.edu/ssp/cgi-bin/tei-natamer-idx.pl?sessionid=7f000001&type=doc&tei2id=pam013> >
“I have long viewed your condition with great interest. For many years I have been acquainted with your people, and under all variety of circumstances, in peace and war. Your fathers were well known to me, and the regard which I cherished for them has caused me to feel great solicitude for your situation.”
“I have no motive, my friends, to deceive you. I am sincerely desirous to promote your welfare. Listen to me, therefore, while I tell you that you cannot remain where you now are. Circumstances that cannot be controlled, and which are beyond the reach of human laws, render it impossible that you can flourish in the midst of a civilized community… remove to the West and join your countrymen, who are already established there. And the sooner you do this, the sooner you will commence your career of improvement and prosperity.”
“The United States have assigned to you a fertile and extensive country, with a very fine climate adapted to your habits, and with all the other natural advantages which you ought to desire or expect.”
“1st. For an addition to the country already assigned to you west of the Mississippi, and for the conveyance of the whole of it, by patent, in fee simple. And also for the security of the necessary political rights, and for preventing white persons from trespassing upon you.
2d. For the payment of the full value to each individual, of his possession in Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina and Tennessee.
3d. For the removal, at the expense of the United States, of your whole people; for their subsistence for a year after their arrival in their new country, and for a gratuity of one hundred and fifty dollars to each person.
4th. For the usual supply of rifles, blankets, and kettles.
5th. For the investment of the sum of four hundred thousand dollars, in order to secure a permanent annuity.
6th. For adequate provision for schools, agricultural instruments, domestic animals, missionary establishments, the support of orphans, &c.
7th. For the payment of claims.
8th. For granting pensions to such of your people as have been disabled in the service of the United States.”
<http://www.wsu.edu:8001/~dee/NAANTH/MEMORIAL.HTM <http://www.wsu.edu:8001/~dee/NAANTH/MEMORIAL.HTM> >
“the United States, in Congress assembled, received the Cherokees and their nation into favor and protection; and that the chiefs and warriors, for themselves and all parts of the Cherokee nation, acknowledged themselves and the said Cherokee nation to be under the protection of the United States of America, and of no other sovereign whatsoever: they also stipulated, that the said Cherokee nation will not hold any treaty with any foreign power, individual State, or with individuals of any State”
“The Cherokees were happy and prosperous under a scrupulous observance of treaty stipulations by the government of the United States, and from the fostering hand extended over them, they made rapid advances in civilization, morals, and in the arts and sciences. Little did they anticipate, that when taught to think and feel as the American citizen, and to have with him a common interest, they were to be despoiled by their guardian, to become strangers and wanderers in the land of their fathers, forced to return to the savage life, and to seek a new home in the wilds of the far west”Kevin
Some of the legal and constitutional issues at stake in the debate have to do with the treaties that the United States government made with the Cherokee nations in regards to their land. The petition that sparked the debate calls for the Federal Government to preserve the faith of the treaties that were solemnly executed, vindicate it’s constitutional authority, and secure the character of the nation from lasting shame and reproach. Another issue has to do with the example made in the petition about the two American citizens, who settled in the Cherokee nation. They were under the sanction of the Federal Government, but were arrested while peacefully residing in the territory and are now in prison for nothing more than refusing to take an oath of allegiance to that state. Each of these were keys issues in the debate. The Senate seems to be less sympathetic towards the cause of the Cherokees. They feel that the United States obtained, by treaty, the power to legislate over the Cherokees, and transferred it to Georgia.
One of the documents is titled, Constitution of the Cherokee Nation. I found this document very interesting because of how complex it was. More Importantly, a part that stood out was Article 17 which states: No person who denies the being of God, of future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the Civil department of this nation. I never heard of any such law before, and I found it intriguing that it would appear in this constitution if it doesn’t even appear in the constitution of the United States. The other document is titled, Andrew Jackson to the Cherokee Tribe of Indians East of the Mississippi River. Andrew Jackson states, “I have no motive, my friends, to deceive you. I am sincerely desirous to promote your welfare.” In this document, Andrew Jackson is confronting the Cherokees that reside east of the Mississippi River of their poor living situations. He reminds them that there is no more game for them and they must rely on agriculture only, to which they have not even acquired much property. His assures them that it is just going to get worse, and his message is such that they move west of the Mississippi River. He assure them that it is for their benfit.Rebecca M.
Document One:
Executive Document Number 286
This document is a memorial and realization of the protection of the Cherokee Nation. When the USA and the Cherokees made treaties, it was said that the congress took the Cherokees and their nation into their protection. They also said Cherokee nation will not hold any treaty with any foreign power, individual State, or with individuals of any State. The government promised that, "all white people who have intruded, or may hereafter intrude, on the lands reserved for the Cherokees, shall be removed by the United States, and proceeded against, according to the provisions of the act, passed 30th March, 1802". There were so many promises of protection and security, and it would be a waste to mention them all. The Cherokee were happy and prosperous under these treaties, but "Little did they anticipate, that when taught to think and feel as the American citizen, and to have with him a common interest, they were to be despoiled by their guardian, to become strangers and wanderers in the land of their fathers, forced to return to the savage life, and to seek a new home in the wilds of the far west, and that without their consent". This means, that they didnt know that when taught to think and feel like the Americans, like the Americans taught them to do, that the Americans would turn on them, and treat them like savages because they felt threatened.
Document Two:
Andrew Jackson to the Cherokee Tribe of Indians East of the Mississippi River
In this document, President Jackson writes to the Cherokee Nation on March 16th, 1835. Jackson is urging them to give up the fight for their homeland, and says that the Cherokees will be much better off if they leave for land west of the Mississippi River. He says that they must remove, because the situation is beyond any of their control. He tells the Cherokees that he will be sending commissioners to negotiate favorable terms for their removal and emigration. He tells them that he has hope that they will accept the advice he is giving to them as a "friend".
"I shall, in the course of a short time, appoint commissioners for the purpose of meeting the whole body of your people in council. They will explain to you, more fully, my views, and the nature of the stipulations which are offered to you.
These stipulations provide:
1st. For an addition to the country already assigned to you west of the Mississippi, and for the conveyance of the whole of it, by patent, in fee simple. And also for the security of the necessary political rights, and for preventing white persons from trespassing upon you.
2d. For the payment of the full value to each individual, of his possession in Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina and Tennessee.
3d. For the removal, at the expense of the United States, of your whole people; for their subsistence for a year after their arrival in their new country, and for a gratuity of one hundred and fifty dollars to each person.
4th. For the usual supply of rifles, blankets, and kettles.
5th. For the investment of the sum of four hundred thousand dollars, in order to secure a permanent annuity.
6th. For adequate provision for schools, agricultural instruments, domestic animals, missionary establishments, the support of orphans, &c. [et cetera]
7th. For the payment of claims.
8th. For granting pensions to such of your people as have been disabled in the service of the United States".
Jackson says that they need to think of these things and then "shut their ears to bad counsels". He tells them to look at thier conditions as they are right now, and then think of what it could be if they follow the advice he is giving them.Christina
1.) The first article that I found interesting was Andrew Jackson's letter to the Cherokee tribe of Indians east of the Mississippi River. I thought this article was very contradicting because he said that the Cherokee's condition would become worse and worse if they did not leave and head to the west of the Mississippi River. He does not take into consideration that the Cherokee's will have to go through the painful and cold journey to their new home. Along this journey many of the Cherokee's would die from starvation, coldness and sickness. Another thing that I find strange is that Jackson urges the Cherokee's to give up their homeland but then he admits that it doesn’t matter because no matter what they will be forced to eventually leave.
2.) The second article that I found interesting was the Trail of Tears and the Forced Relocation of the Cherokee Nation. I thought that this article was very sad and made me realize just how painful it must have been for the Cherokee's to leave their homelands. I felt as if many of the adults knew that they would not make it during the long journey that they were about to embark on.
Sarah
What are the legal, including constitutional, issues at stake in this debate?
The main issue at stake is the legality of the actions of certain men from the State of Georgia. As the petition from New York clearly points out, the Indians are protected under certain rights guaranteed by the Treaty of 1791 and the Treaty of 1798. In these agreements, respectively, the U.S. had promised that lands not previously ceded to the U.S. would remain the property of the Cherokee tribe. It is crucial to note that this promise was sanctioned not only by the U.S. Senate, but by Presidents Washington and Adams. Just as important to note is the fact that the Cherokee had in no way violated their terms of the agreement; that is, if the U.S. did in fact decide to go back on their word, it could not be justified as a reaction to any Cherokee wrong-doing. The last charge in the petition is more of a call to action. The New Yorkers contest that “no steps have been taken by the Government of the United States, to prevent these manifest violations of its laws and treaties.” The implication is clear; if the government did not step in and punish those who were violating the terms of agreement, they would be just as guilty as those who physically committed the acts.How did the two sides think about the Cherokee?
Side One (represented by Georgia Senator John Forsyth)
Believing in the justice and righteousness of their cause, “Georgia has taken her course and will pursue it,” regardless of how the Senate decides. The representatives of Georgia believe it should fall to their discretion how to treat the Cherokee residing within their borders, and are appalled at “the idea of shedding the blood of white men in this crusade in favor of Indian rights.” Quoting the Treaty of DeWitt’s Corner from 1777, Senator Forsyth concludes that the Cherokee forfeited the land that is now Georgia after defeat by South Carolina.Side Two (represented by Maine Senator Peleg Sprague)
In opposition, Senator Sprague believes that the debate is less about the State of Georgia and more fully involves “the question of the rights and duties of the United States, with respect to the Indian tribes generally, but more especially the Cherokees.” He is quick to point out that each of the treaties which guarantee the rights of the Indians, rights which they are now invoking, are the result of a vigorous and proper process; each treaty was “duly appointed with full power; ratified by the Senate; confirmed by the President; and announced to the world.” The question has now become whether or not the U.S. will extend the protection it promised to the Cherokee tribe in those treaties, and stand behind its word.
Two Articles of Interest
Andrew Jackson’s Letter to the Cherokee Tribe
This letter is particularly interesting because of the word choices Jackson uses. Reading the letter from a historical vantage point (that is, knowing what happened on the Trail of Tears), the tone seems to become sinister and purposefully deceitful. Jackson positions himself as a man who has strong ties to the Cherokee fathers, and is truly saddened by what he terms “the moral evils which are hastening your destruction.” Listing such evils as alcohol and the rules of the white men, of which the uneducated Cherokee may be unaware and yet still punished for, Jackson emphasizes that he is “sincerely desirous to promote your welfare.” What I found particularly telling what that Jackson comes to the conclusion of the letter with the phrase, “the choice now is before you.” This is so striking because we are now well aware that there was no such “choice” at all.
The Cherokee Constitution
This document is remarkable as a testament to how civilized the Cherokee tribe had become, according to the standards of the U.S. In reading over the Cherokee Constitution, I was struck by how similar in format and structure it is to the U.S. Constitution. Even some of the phrasing is familiar:"We the Representatives of the people of the Cherokee Nation, in Convention assembled in order to establish justice ensure tranquility, promote our common welfare, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of liberty…” (Sec 1)
“The power of this Government shall be divided into three distinct departments, the legislative, Executive, and Judicial.” (Sec 2, Art 2)
This intelligent, carefully thought-out document is in direct contrast to the stereotypical view one might have about the Cherokee. It paints a very different portrait of a civilized, educated people as opposed to the barbaric savages of legends. This in turn speaks volumes about the cruelty of the act of driving them from their homes. It is hard to make the argument that Americans were protecting themselves or acting on behalf of the Cherokee’s best interests (as Jackson’s letter above implies) after reading this.
Emily B.
Andrew Jackson to the Cherokee tribe of Indians East of the Mississippi River
-I find it surprising that Jackson starts off his letter by calling the Indians his friends, when he had tried to take away their land after they helped him during war. Jackson seems to be worried about how the Indians are making the transaction of becoming more like the white people and how they will eventually end up dying off like the other tribes before them. He then goes on to say that he had told their elders to agree to the removal and makes it sound like if they had agreed they would be better off in a new land with lots of fertile soil. In the beginning of this document it is almost as if he is reprimanding them for refusing to the removal process. Jackson also talks about how they will pay the Indians to remove themselves from their lands and how if they do they will be making the right choice. Other tribes have no and their young men “are committing depredations upon the property of [Jackson’s] citizens, and are shedding their blood”. He makes it sound as if the Indians have no other choice and must remove themselves for the good of their people. He also states how the US government will pay for the removal process and how it will not be harmful at all to the Indians.
The Papers of Chief John Ross
- Ross states that there has yet to be a treaty in which both the US and the Cherokees are happy with and all of the problems between the two are resolved. Ross is mad that he is mentioned in the treaty which leads others to believe that he supported it yet he didn’t sign it. Those who read it believe that his name was just omitted but he didn’t sign it at all. It is an unfair representation of his name and his tribe on a legal document that he had no part in. He states that yes they will give them money but they will not legally own the land or have the title. Ross does not believe that the US should have the right to remove the Indians and not give the Indians the security that they will not lose their land again. Instead the treaty states that if the US wants to expand even farther that the Indians must revert to the US ways. He thinks that it is unfair that the acts that were carried out by other tribes are having effects on his tribe and his people. They should not be reprimanded for the actions of the other tribes.CJ
The Cherokee Indians living in Georgia had no real constitutional rights, because they were not American citizens. But this made for an interesting debate over both the constitutionality of Native Americans and making a new treaty with them. John Forsyth, the Georgia senator in favor of Cherokee removal, claims that because the United States has sovereignty over all lands that the Cherokee live in, the latter’s government does not have a right to form treaties with the parent, U.S. government. Also, the land and protection granted by the U.S. to the Cherokee as part of the act of 1802 ran out, largely due to a gold rush into their lands in 1829.
DOCUMENTS
1. Andrew Jackson to the Cherokee, March 16, 1835
I think it is interesting that he addresses the Cherokee at the beginning of this letter as, “My friends...” Then he goes on to draft one of the most racist official documents I have ever read. He points to their “peculiar customs” and claims “moral evils” are destroying their culture. This of course is untrue, as history knows that Cherokee culture had been on the rise in recent years, and John Ridge had pointed out in his letter that his people are sobering up and assimilating themselves by owning slaves, becoming Christians, and intermarrying. It is more “peculiar,” to use one of Jackson’s words, to try and move an entire population of a culture, as evidenced by the Trail of Tears, than to allow them to stay and prosper. This is truly one of the most unfortunate acts of the American government, and one that is sugar-coated in many history textbooks that I have read in the past.
Jackson’s side of it is pressure from his own countrymen trying to expand into that land, and also the realization that relocation would solve this problem. He does give eight provisions the U.S. government will grant, among them being paying for their land past the Mississippi, and vague promises to establish schools, etc. in their new lands. It seems that while being racist in the beginning, he does establish political correctness with his promises of a better life for both Americans and Cherokees if they move west.
2. Memorial and Protest of the Cherokee Nation
This document is equally as interesting as the Jackson letter. The Cherokee appeal to the recent flourishing of their culture and say that it is with the United States government that they have been prospering. They feel as though the U.S. has helped them greatly, with missionaries’ conversions, their new alphabet (which was in some ways similar to the English one), and their loyalty to their parent government. History is on their side, they claim, as they had always honored the treaties they had signed in the past with the U.S., and the U.S. had always held up their end as well. The new treaty proposed to them would betray their civilization, and ultimately the treaty, “under Almighty God” (another interesting affirmation because this points to their Christianization, and subsequently, Americanization), would be fraudulent.Francis
1) Did the United States government have the right to remove the Cherokee off their land? The United States had recently made a treaty with the Cherokee promising them protection and trade. However, the United States also recalled that the Cherokee were their enemies in the American Revolution as they had been allies of Great Britain. Another legal/constitutional question that arose was did the state of Georgia have the right to invade Cherokee lands and arrest Cherokees whom they considered to be breaking U.S. laws? Even under the Articles of Confederation, no state was allowed to enter into alliances or engage in wars without the consent of the federal government. Since Chief Justice Marshall made his decision to protect the Cherokee, it would have been unconstitutional for anyone to be invading Cherokee land and trying to get them off their land. According to John Forsyth, the United States had sovereignty over the Cherokee. How would that have been possible if the United States acknowledged the Cherokee as a separate entity – the Nation?
2) The Senators from Maine and Georgia had opposing views on the Cherokee. According to Mr. Forsyth, “You see, sir, the Cherokees admit that South Carolina had, by conquest, acquired a right to all the land in the valleys below the Unicaye Mountains.” In Mr. Forsyth’s view, the conqueror had the right to choose the conditions for the conquered. Since the United States defeated the Cherokee and Great Britain in the American Revolution, the United States had the right to decide the Cherokee’s fate as they now had direct power over them. He also claimed that the United States had sole authority to manage the affairs of the Indians as they saw fit.
On the other hand, Peleg Sprague from Maine, questioned Mr. Forsyth’s claims asking if the United States really had the authority and right to “drive them [the Cherokee] from all their lands? or to destroy the Cherokee nation?” Did the United States have the power to kick the native people off their land for expansion reasons?In Memorial and Protest of the Cherokee Nation, the Cherokee were originally excited about being protected by and being involved with the United States. However, most Cherokee never anticipated that they would be sent out west as the United States broke its agreements with the natives. This major expedition to the West would take a large toll of Cherokee lives and the Cherokee would never make a total recovery until many years later. The Cherokee, needless to say, felt rejected and abandoned as the white culture kicked them out of Georgia and all the way west as Oklahoma.
Andrew Jackson’s speech to the Cherokee tribe was all propaganda. Jackson never liked Native Americans and simply wanted them to move west so that the United States could continually expand and someday fulfill the belief of Manifest Destiny. In his speech, Jackson, who portrays himself as a friend of the Cherokee, explains how life will only grow worse for the natives as they were living under Georgia’s state laws and that many of them owned little or no land. He contended that by moving out west, the Cherokee would be promised extensive, farming land to settle on. He also explained that there circumstances that could not be controlled at the present time. The irony in that was that Jackson was in charge of the Executive Branch of the US government and had the Federal Army at his disposal if needed. So he basically lied to the Cherokee so that they would move on with their lives and then he would not have to deal with them anymore at the present time.
Mindy
Legal and Constitutional Issues at Stake:
Perhaps the most egregious offense to Cherokee rights would be the State of Georgia just allowing and actually sanctioning the taking of people’s land unlawfully and giving it away to others in a lottery. This violates many treaties, including the treaties of 1791, 1798, and 1802, each of which guaranteed that the Cherokee could keep the land that was not already ceded to the United States. Equally as bad, but not quite a legal issue, the Federal government did not attempt to enforce the treaties stated above. Georgia referred to the taking of land as “formally annexed” Cherokee territory. What does formally annexed mean then as opposed to regularly annexed? Does this indicate that the State of George believed that it was their right to take the land because they disagreed with the Federal Government’s promises? Most likely, this was another manifestation of an issue between state and federal rights. In the early 1800s, the states did believe that it was their prerogative to simply not enforce or even ignore federal mandates and treaties, as the state of George clearly did in this instance with the Cherokee.How did the two sides view the Cherokee?
John Forsyth’s side believed that the Indians east of the Mississippi should be removed, but the Indians in New York, New England, Virginia should be dealt with be those states. The Government should protect the Choctaws, Chickasaws, and Cherokees from oppressive states of Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. The other side, represented by Maine Senator Peleg Sprague contended that the Indians should not be removed from the land that was promised them in many and various treaties.What is interesting in each of the documents chosen?
- Andrew Jackson’s Letter to Cherokee Tribes East of the Mississippi River (1835)
- After reading Jackson’s letter, the Cherokee Removal Issue became a little more puzzling. Reading the petition instilled a sense that the Federal Government was trying to make things right by promising the Cherokee their lands. Almost like the Federal Government had acted entirely in aid of the Cherokee, and the states were the real one’s to blame for the atrocities that culminated in the Trial of Tears. Jackson’s letter revealed a much more complicated issue. While the Federal Government did appear to be a friend to the Cherokee, the presidency under Andrew Jackson was only too willing to basically kick them off their rightful land. Jackson even claims to be writing to the Cherokee as a friend urging those still east of the Mississippi to move further west. Here, the Federal Government seems as though they also are disregarding the Cherokee rights and have no plan to enforce the treaties.
- Chief John Ross’s Letter in answer to Inquires from a Friend.
- It is interesting that not only were the treaties not enforced, but they were deceptive by very nature. John Ross says that they were signed by unauthorized individuals in Washington and omitted certain names and other things, including his own name because he would not agree to the conditions of the treaty. Also, this letter illustrated that the Cherokee knew exactly what was happening to them. Ross states that they are not secure in the homeland promised to them and are undergoing the same miseries that the United States was supposed to relieve. Also, the United States made the Cherokee pay seven million dollars for land that they do not own the title for and that will “revert to the United States, if the Indians become extinct, or abandon the same.” Ross believes that this simple phrase indicates that the United States never really believed that the land was by right Cherokee land. Revert implies that the land was the United States before and will be again. Ross also endeavors to clear up misconceptions that he is the leader of the Cherokee. Instead, he serves under all the Cherokee people to help them.
William
The legal issues that are at stake in this debate are that the U.S had a treaty with the Cherokee nation giving them land for their tribes. The problem with this was that these treaties and laws were not followed the U.S citizens and no punishment was given out when the laws were broken. People who trespassed on the land given to the Cherokee’s were suppose to be fined $1,000 dollars and given a sentence of 3 months in prison. The problem began in 1829 when the laws stopped being enforced and people of the state of Georgia would trespass into the Cherokee lands and randomly arrest the Cherokee’s and violated their rights under the treaties passed before them. The land of the Cherokee’s that were taken in prison was then taken by the people of Georgia and divided out to the citizens by way of land lottery. This was legal in Georgia because of new laws that were passed. Cherokee’s were also arrested for not signing an oath to the state of which they resided in even though they were residing in the land that was given to them by the treaty.
Nothing was done by the government of the U.S even though they stated in the treaty that these lands were to be given to them forever. This broke the law of the treaty between the Cherokee’s and the U.S government allowing for trust between the two to no longer exist. It is clear that the Georgia governor does not care about the Cherokee nation and only cares about how the state of Georgia makes out in the deal. He wants this land and he feels that it has been taken from him by the U.S government. On the other hand the governor from Main feels that we owe the land to the Cherokee’s because of the treaties that we have signed with them in the past.
The Papers of John Ross:
What I found that interrrested me in this writing was how much the Cherokee people did not want to agree to the treaty and the strong feelings they have towards their freedom. Even though they were being imprisoned and treated terribly they still were able to keep their dignity and stand up for themselves and against the U.S government and their treaties.
Letter and Other Papers Relating to Cherokee Affairs:
I find it almost comical that the U.S government of this time feels that they are offering a great deal to these natives that have lived the land for so many years. The U.S government i feel chooses not to hear what the Cherokees have to say and are looking out for their best interrest. In the documents they talk as if they are giving the Cherokee's pleanty of land which may be the case however it is not their land and they are restricting the Cherokee's to only that land.Amanda
http://neptune3.galib.uga.edu/ssp/cgi-bin/tei-natamer-idx.pl?sessionid=7f000001=doc=pam013 <http://neptune3.galib.uga.edu/ssp/cgi-bin/tei-natamer-idx.pl?sessionid=7f000001&type=doc&tei2id=pam013>
Everything that Andrew Jackson says in his letter is the opposite of what John Ridge wrote in his letter. Jackson says that they are evil and uncivilized. However, he does not have the evidence to back up his claims. It seems almost as if he never gave them the chance to prove themselves. It says that he just warned them to get out because he thinks that they would not be able to make it. He says that the circumstances under which they are living can not be controlled but how does he know that? The whites started forcing them out before hand so they were never given the proper chance.
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2722
"In the late 1780s U.S. officials began to urge the Cherokees to abandon hunting and their traditional ways of life and to instead learn how to live, worship, and farm like Christian American yeomen. Many Cherokees embraced this "civilization program."' What is wrong with letting them live where they are if they adopted the way of life the settlers told them to adopt. How can they remove the people of the Cherokee nation if they had a treaty that protected them and in the case of Worcester v. Georgia, the supreme court even decided that Georgia had violated that policy. Wouldn't Jackson be afraid that the nation would disapprove of what he was doing by not caring what the treaty stated and continued with forcing the Cherokees out?Rebecca B.
“You are now placed in the midst of a white population. Your peculiar customs, which regulated your intercourse with one another, have been abrogated by the great political community among which you live; and you are now subject to the same laws which govern the other citizens of Georgia and Alabama. You are liable to prosecutions for offences, and to civil actions for a breach of any of your contracts. Most of your people are uneducated, and are liable to be brought into collusion at all times with their white neighbors. Your young men are acquiring habits of intoxication. With strong passions, and without those habits of restraint which our laws inculcate and render necessary, they are frequently driven to excesses which must eventually terminate in their ruin.”
The Cherokees wanted to have their own customs and their own lands but with this quote you realize that Andrew Jackson and the founding fathers feel that the Cherokee’s need to be subjected to the same laws as whites.
“Instead of being a divided people as you now are, arrayed into parties bitterly opposed to each other, you would have been a prosperous and united community.”
The Cherokees should have moved when they had the opportunity if they had they would be a prosperous, happy nation.
- Andrew Jackson
“from the earliest existence of this government, the United States, in Congress assembled, received the Cherokees and their nation into favor and protection; and that the chiefs and warriors, for themselves and all parts of the Cherokee nation, acknowledged themselves and the said Cherokee nation to be under the protection of the United States of America, and of no other sovereign whatsoever..”
“Little did they anticipate, that when taught to think and feel as the American citizen, and to have with him a common interest, they were to be despoiled by their guardian, to become strangers and wanderers in the land of their fathers, forced to return to the savage life, and to seek a new home in the wilds of the far west, and that without their consent.”Mike M.
Problems arose in 1829, when the land of Cherokees was supposed to be protected from trespassing by a treaty which prohibited all persons from surveying or making intrusions upon their land under penalty of three months in prison along with a 1000 dollar fine. The president himself was supposed to enforce this act as this land was guaranteed to the Cherokee nation forever years earlier. However, the government of Georgia stopped enforcing these rules, as people were trespassing on the land and were not being subject to punishment. Many wrongfully arrested Cherokees and were not subject to any punishment. The rights of many Indians were violated and much of their land was annexed to adjacent counties. Provisions were made to survey the land and divide it among people of the state in a lottery. Two peaceful American citizens were arrested for not taking an oath to the state as a separate member of the confederacy even though the land in which they lived was given to them by the national government. The Governor of Georgia passed several laws making it legal for the state to do these things. Despite these violations of the law and various treaties, the government of the United States did nothing.
The Governor of Georgia just wanted the Cherokee out of their state and out of their way so they could take the lands for themselves. However, the Governor of Maine was that these treaties were important and should be honored by the state of Georgia because it said in the treaty this land was to be theirs forever.
Memorial and Protest of the Cherokee Nation: I find it interesting how the Cherokee people were so willing to cooperate with the Americans that as they did everything including abandoning their past and any life they have ever known, and were actually still successful in their new role that they were so willing to accept. Despite this the American people still wanted no part of the Indians and were so racist that they were completely unwilling to accept them as the human beings they are and even when dressed as common white people were still viewed as savages.
Lithograph: Sequoyah did exactly what the people of the United States were urging his people to do my creating the Cherokee syllabry which enabled these people to read, write, and record their laws in their own language in order to adapt and become fully "civilized". However, efforts like this were only deceiving and never meant anything in the long run, as they were still never fully accepted as social equals. In the end, they sold out their past, their culture, and their heritage for nothing.