The Debate Over Indian Removal, Essay Example

There are many pros and cons associated with the handling of the Indians and their inhabitance.  Much debate has been put into place concerning whether the United States government had jurisdiction or legal right to take away the Indian’s land for other use. The debate will clearly show the sides involved and their belief of rightful actions and ownership.  The whites felt they had legal right for the preservation of society to relocate the Indian’s to different locations.  The Indian’s argued their land had religious and personal value; they were the legal owner and had no obligation to leave.  The debates made for both side clearly show the manipulation and power that was used inappropriately.  The Indian’s were left wandering, their futures addressed with disregard and indifference.

Those arguments for the removal of Indian’s state that, “Professing a desire to civilize and settle them, we have at the same time lost no opportunity to purchase their lands and thrust them farther into the wilderness.”This was done with the intention of the Indian’s being out of sight out of mind, along with their savage habits.  The contrary to such arguments are that the majority of the Indian’s did not act in a savage matter, except in the event they were defending their land, their ritual sites, and their homes.

Many Indian’s inhabited Alabama.  When Alabama was admitted into the Union, they were given the same state provisions granted by Congress. “There is no constitutional, conventional, or legal provision which allows them less power over the Indians within their borders than is possessed by Maine or New York.”  This granted them the ability to manipulate and take the land that the Indians inhabited in this state as well.   They justified it by the agricultural and economic necessity with promises of new land to replace what they are giving up.

Through force and persuasion, the Indians were moved from mountain to mountain, as well as river to river. This caused some tribes to cease to exist, while others have a very few left to fight to defend their names. Taking the land for economic purposes left the Indians surrounded by whites and their dominance for what society should exist of.  Their ideals of civilization destroyed their resources, leaving the fate of the Narragausett, the Cherokee, the Creek, the Choctaw, and the Mohegan’s very grim.

The United States would not prefer to have land covered with forests with thousands of harmful Indians hidden in them.  They wanted a Republic covered with towns, cities, farms, and extensive embellishment.  The whites believed this improvement could only happen ifan industry is executed through civilization, religion, and liberty.  The religion they used to manipulate Indians into believing in their misrepresentation, leaving many willingly signing over their land.  The others who fought for their land eventually had it ceased, adding to the ideals that Indians are violent and savage.   There were no options given to allow the Indian’s to keep their ritual sites and land.  A law was passed and the seizing of land was enforced.

“Our neighbor, the state of Georgia, is pressing hard upon us, and urging us to relinquish our possessions for her benefit. We are told, if we do not leave the country, which we dearly love, and betake ourselves to the western wilds, the laws of the state will be extended over us, and the time, 1st of June, 1830, is appointed for the execution of the edict.”  Appeals were made, attempting to prevent this from being acted out.  The request for reprieve was not given to just the state or local level, it went all the way to the President.  These requests were denied, and the Indian removal was ordered to be enforced.   The argument for removal was on the grounds that the needed recourses were only available by cession of Georgia, and the Indians relocated west of the Mississippi. The fertile soil and mild climate was only available at this location, so their argument was based on remote location need.  This order was enforced with the intention of doing no harm, however in the event that resistance occurred, the removal would become injurious.

It is hard to find justification with the actions of the United States government.  The removal of the Indians was not backed by any valid argument.Denying that the Indian’s had no right to their own land was to discredit them as a part of human society. Making laws and using their power to enforce and carry them out. They had the power to manipulate the minority, and they used it to their advantage.  No matter what the pros argue for the Indian removal, there has yet to be a proven, legit reason for the actions that took place. The 1820’s prevented the Indians from preserving their and their land, and essentially their existence.