The Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the Trail of Tears

 

The Trail of Tears is one of the most infamous episodes in U.S. history. And for many Americans, that is the extent of their familiarity with Native American culture and history. Due to the limited time allotted to studying Native American history, the policy leading to this terrible event is often glossed over or ignored entirely. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 (also known as IRA) is largely responsible for making the United States what it is today. Major research questions include why and how Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren approved the IRA? The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was part of US expansionist policy in the 19th century to appease Southern states and justify Westward expansion, but can be considered inhumane and racist as its consequences led to the forced relocation, significant deaths, and shifts in the perception of Native American claims to land.


The relationship of the US government with the Native Americans began to destabilize in the beginning of the 19th century. For some time, the federal government maintained a policy of respecting legal rights of the Native Americans. However, the rapid growth of the states on the eastern side of the Mississippi River has pushed them towards Native American historical land. Despite peaceful interactions between the Indians and settlers, it was evident that the Native Americans were not willing to give up their land, and peaceful co-existence was challenged (Ehle, 2011). The prospect of Indians exchanging lands was discussed politically as early as Thomas Jefferson’s presidency, but it is only in the 1800s that pressure was increased. In 1814, Andrew Jackson, who was a major general at the time, led an expedition against the Creek Indians in the famous Battle of Horse Shoe band, resulting in tremendous defeat and Indians having to give up over 20 million acres of land. Once entering politics, Jackson began the decade-long push to displace Indians from their territory, culminating the Indian Removal Act of 1930, one year after his election as President.

The Indian Removal Act of 1830 states that it is “an act to provide for an exchange of lands with the Indians residing in any of the states or territories and for their removal west of the river Mississippi” (Digital History, 2021) This act was passed to facilitate the relocation of Native Americans west of the Mississippi River The policy gave the president the authority to ‘negotiate’ treaties with Native Americans and that the Native Americans may trade their territories for land located west of the Mississippi River. A similar scheme was used in the Northern states, along with applied pressure, to great success. However, in the South, the Five Civilized Tribes (Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, Cherokee, and Creek) refused to leave despite promise of title ownership of the Western land, something they lacked before (Ehle, 2011). Rightly, they refused, as they lived on cultivated land, their children went to local schools and learned trades, while it was also their ancestral land.

The IRA affected the tribes that lived in the Southeastern region of the United States. Even though it was well-liked by whites in the south, this measure was only approved by the smallest of margins. Hawks such as Andrew Jackson fully refused to recognize the rights of Indians and continuously called for their removal. Traditionally, Indian lands were seen as autonomous nations, so the federal government would deal with them as they would diplomatically with foreign nations, via treaties. Jackson saw this as a violation of the US Constitution due to the principle of state sovereignty, as was later supported in the Supreme Court case of Johnson v. M’Intosh, which also indicated that Indians could not hold titles to their controlled lands within the US. Therefore, if they were not inherently sovereign, then they must obey the existing laws of the Union and assimilate. Jackson viewed the situation realistically, arguing that the demise of Indians on their territory was inevitable, and the federal government was offering a means of peaceful transition, to what otherwise would like be a bloody war (Ehle, 2011). Initially, the Indians were promised self-rule and titles to their land if having agreed to relocate. Jackson also sought to appease the Southern states, which were already showing some level of criticism for the Union, 30 years prior to the Civil War.

Once implemented, the IRA began the process of Indian removal. Lands to the west of the Mississippi River, at approximately present-day Oklahoma, were designated as Indian Territory. Notably, the IRA was implemented gradually, giving the tribes time to negotiate or voluntarily leave. The Indian removal was enforced largely by the next Martin Van Buren administration. Van Buren was a strong supporter and key advisor to Jackson, serving in his cabinet and later forming the Democratic Party alongside him. Van Buren is attributed to being the force behind the violent implementation of the IRA. The Treaty of New Echota signed during the Jackson presidency in 1835 stated that the Cherokee were to relinquish their land within two years (Ehle, 2011). However, when Van Buren came into power in 1837, the country was engaged in a bitter dispute with the tribe who was refusing to leave. Van Buren ordered the military to begin force removal, justifying the rapid and aggressive action as “If they be removed, they can be protected from those associations and evil practices which exert so pernicious and destructive an influence over their destinies” (Van Buren, 1837). This had profound consequences on the involved tribes and US history.