Removal of the Native Americans Term Paper

Excerpt from Term Paper :

He was viewing them as little children who required guidance. He tended to believe that the policy of removal had great benefits to the Indians. Majority of the white Americans were thinking that United States was not capable of extending past Mississippi. The removal was capable of saving the Indian nationals from the white's depredations (Foreman 1932).

The removal could make them to govern themselves peacefully

It was assumed that the removal was to resettle the Indians in a region where they were capable of governing themselves peacefully. However, a number of Americans viewed this as being a mere excuse for a cruel and appalling course of action, and complained against the removal of the Indian nationals. Their complaints however could not prevent the southeastern populations from being removal. The first lot of people to sign the removal treaty was the Choctaws. They did this in September 1830. A number of them decided to reside in Mississippi (Foreman 1932).

The growing population of the residents of America made the Indians to be removed

The United States' population which expanded swiftly during the 19th century created a lot of tensions with the Indians who were situated within the boundaries of the different states. Although the government did not require sovereign Indian enclaves in the boundaries of the states, there was no need by the Indians to move or to sacrifice their distinctive identities. The land of Cherokee that they lost was tremendously valuable. Due to the growing population, they were in need of land. That forced them also to pay for some pieces of land. The Chickasaw were different from other tribes because they got compensation in the form of cash from the United States for their pieces of land which were lying in the eastward side of Mississippi, the other tribes however exchanged land grants (Foreman 1932).


It is evident that Jackson's justification for the removal of the Indians was in actual sense not justified. This is because the Indians were forcefully removed from their native land with which they had strong cultural attachments. The removal of the Five Civilized Tribes from their native land via the biased and prejudiced Indian Removal Act of 1830 was a serious violation of their legal, human and political rights (Crute 1987)

Violation of political right

The fact that the land and freedom of the Five Civilized Tribes were taken away was a grave violation of their consent. They were made captives when the Indian Removal Act of 1830 gave soldiers the authority to imprison the Five Civilized Tribes in horrible stockades. Their protests through the existing legal systems (courts) were not honored and the court always never favored them. Their voices and desires which they tried to advocate for were blatantly ignored (Corbett 1978)

Violation of legal rights

The fact that the Five Civilized Tribes had their lands grabbed (stolen) through the use of dishonest treaties was a serious violation of their legal rights. They even established treaties with the colonialists that had special guarantees for their residence, peace and privileges. These were however breached as was evident in the letter from Cherokee Chief John Ross who protested to the U.S. Senate as well as House of Representatives of how the various trespassers looted, injured and even murdered members of the Five Civilized Tribes (Gibson 1981)

Violation of human rights

The human rights of the Five Civilized Tribes were seriously violated when they were subjected to inhuman conditions and were deemed subordinate to the rest of the U.S. population. Jackson called them 'savages' and were compared to livestock. They were herded like farm animals and subjected to extremely horrible conditions. Their health deteriorated as a result of the mistreatment and lack of shelter and clothing. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 also denied the Five Civilized Tribes their democratic rights and was a direct violation of their political rights (Gibson 1981)

Annotated bibliography

Crute, Joseph H. Units of the confederate states army. Midlothian, Virginia. Derwent Books .1987

The book is stating that as December 1861 was coming to an end, the Department of Association of Trans-Mississippi had employed and prepared about 41 people with cavalry regiments that totaled to about 28,693 men. Incorporated in this figure were regiments and battalions both totaling to five (5,145) men who were brought up from the nations of
Parts of this Document are Hidden
Click Here to View Entire Document
Chickasaw, Cherokee, Seminole, Choctaw, and Creek Nations.

Dunning, William a. Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction. New York, NY Macmilliam Company, 1898

This article is stating that the consequences of restoration were particularly difficult on the individuals of the Indian Territory, when the territory was becoming a discarding ground by the central government for Indians who came from the entire United States. The Indians were colonized on pieces of land that were forcefully taken from Five Tribes which were colonized through the reconstruction policies. Those who joined the Chickasaw, Cherokees, Creeks, Seminole, and Choctaw tribes were the Wichitas, Delawares, Kickapoos, Poncas, Pawnees, Caddos, Shawnees, Osages among other tribes.

Lindberg, Kip and Matthews, Matt. "To Play a Bold Game: The Battle of Honey Springs" North and South Magazine December 2002: pgs. 56- 61.

The article is stating that in the month of July, the Confederate origin in the Indian Territory met another disaster when their effort to get the Union forces back into Kansas was crushed. Confederate General Douglas Cooper had driven north towards the Texas road to a region that was called Honey Springs. It was situated approximately twenty-six kilometers to the southwestern part of Fort Gibson. The battle that resulted, and the following decrease of Fort Smith, together with the discontinuation of the logistical help of the territory that was on the western side of the Mississippi by the confederation, was an indication of the last momentous Civil War that took place in the Indian Territory.

Gibson, Arrell M. Oklahoma: A History of Five Centuries. Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1981

All through the country, the sectionalism of the first half of the nineteenth century had opened many wounds, and certainly three of the southern tribes were no exception. Much of the conflict within the Cherokees, Creeks, and Seminoles dated back to the removal era when some of the people of these tribes favored emigration to the West while others insisted upon remaining on their ancestral lands. Also, at the outbreak of the Civil War, many people within these tribes wanted nothing to do with the states, which had been responsible for their removal, nor did they want to follow the lead of other acculturated members of their tribes who promoted alignment with the Confederacy. Accordingly, heated antagonisms erupted between tribal factions the roots of which were traceable to these ancient, and complex, economic, political, and cultural tensions. Ultimately, these antagonisms resulted in factions from each of these tribes taking opposite sides in the war

Corbett, William P. Confederate Strongholds in Indian Territory: Forts Davis and McCulloch Early Military Forts and Posts in Oklahoma (Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City, OK 1978): 65-77

The article states that Colonel William Weer of Kansas was placed in command of the Indian Expedition, and on June 1, 1862, began the re-entry into Indian Territory from the Union supply depot at Baxter Springs Kansas. As they marched, the Union invaders followed the Grand River valley into the heart of the Cherokee Nation. Throughout the march, Colonel Watie's cavalry harassed the Union column with hit and run tactics against the unit and its supply lines. Finally, the Union expeditionary force fought with, and defeated Watie's cavalry at Locust Grove on July 3. An excellent source for this battle is found in Annie Heloise Abel's book "The American Indian in the Civil War" (University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE 1992). The resulting Confederate defeat at Locust Grove opened up Union approaches to Tahlequah and Fort Gibson at which time Were divided his force, capturing Fort Gibson with one, and the Cherokee capital at Tahlequah with the other.

Forman, Grant. Indian Removal: the Emigration of the Five Civilized Tribes of Indians

(415 pp., 14 ill., 6 maps, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1932.)

This article entails a historiographical summary of the movement of the Southeastern Indian tribes which were five in number. They were moving from their previous homes and were heading towards the Indian Territory which was located to the western side of Mississippi. This took place approximately three decades to the end of the last century. The explanation has its basis both on the accounts of the modern newspaper and also on the reports from the government. Notes of ethnographical importance in the data that was gathered were not there. Again, the author is offering not even a single interpretation of the entire material. However, the writer has wonderfully done what he was to do, and the volume that resulted contributes greatly to the frontier history. University of Oklahoma press also ought to be…

Sources Used in Documents:

(415 pp., 14 ill., 6 maps, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1932.)

Gibson, Arrell M. Oklahoma: A History of Five Centuries. Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1981

Lindberg, Kip and Matthews, Matt. "To Play a Bold Game: The Battle of Honey Springs" North and South Magazine December 2002: pgs. 56- 61.

Cite This Term Paper:

"Removal Of The Native Americans" (2011, April 09) Retrieved January 23, 2021, from

"Removal Of The Native Americans" 09 April 2011. Web.23 January. 2021. <>

"Removal Of The Native Americans", 09 April 2011, Accessed.23 January. 2021,