Trail of Tears Primary and Secondary Sources
What does this document tell you about the methods of how they determined where to place the emigrant Indians?
Does the map give you any identification to people already living in the area? |
What obstructions do you see that could prevent the path of Indian Removal?
What similarities do you see in the map that could explain why they removed them from their homelands? |
Transcript of President Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress 'On Indian Removal' (1830) Andrew Jackson's Annual Message
It gives me pleasure to announce to Congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation. Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining tribes also to seek the same obvious advantages.
The consequences of a speedy removal will be important to the United States, to individual States, and to the Indians themselves. The pecuniary advantages which it promises to the Government are the least of its recommendations. It puts an end to all possible danger of collision between the authorities of the General and State Governments on account of the Indians. It will place a dense and civilized population in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters. By opening the whole territory between Tennessee on the north and Louisiana on the south to the settlement of the whites it will incalculably strengthen the southwestern frontier and render the adjacent States strong enough to repel future invasions without remote aid. It will relieve the whole State of Mississippi and the western part of Alabama of Indian occupancy, and enable those States to advance rapidly in population, wealth, and power. It will separate the Indians from immediate contact with settlements of whites; free them from the power of the States; enable them to pursue happiness in their own way and under their own rude institutions; will retard the progress of decay, which is lessening their numbers, and perhaps cause them gradually, under the protection of the Government and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community.
What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization and religion?
The present policy of the Government is but a continuation of the same progressive change by a milder process. The tribes which occupied the countries now constituting the Eastern States were annihilated or have melted away to make room for the whites. The waves of population and civilization are rolling to the westward, and we now propose to acquire the countries occupied by the red men of the South and West by a fair exchange, and, at the expense of the United States, to send them to land where their existence may be prolonged and perhaps made perpetual. Doubtless it will be painful to leave the graves of their fathers; but what do they more than our ancestors did or than our children are now doing? To better their condition in an unknown land our forefathers left all that was dear in earthly objects. Our children by thousands yearly leave the land of their birth to seek new homes in distant regions. Does Humanity weep at these painful separations from everything, animate and inanimate, with which the young heart has become entwined? Far from it. It is rather a source of joy that our country affords scope where our young population may range unconstrained in body or in mind, developing the power and facilities of man in their highest perfection. These remove hundreds and almost thousands of miles at their own expense, purchase the lands they occupy, and support themselves at their new homes from the moment of their arrival. Can it be cruel in this Government when, by events which it can not control, the Indian is made discontented in his ancient home to purchase his lands, to give him a new and extensive territory, to pay the expense of his removal, and support him a year in his new abode? How many thousands of our own people would gladly embrace the opportunity of removing to the West on such conditions! If the offers made to the Indians were extended to them, they would be hailed with gratitude and joy.
And is it supposed that the wandering savage has a stronger attachment to his home than the settled, civilized Christian? Is it more afflicting to him to leave the graves of his fathers than it is to our brothers and children? Rightly considered, the policy of the General Government toward the red man is not only liberal, but generous. He is unwilling to submit to the laws of the States and mingle with their population. To save him from this alternative, or perhaps utter annihilation, the General Government kindly offers him a new home, and proposes to pay the whole expense of his removal and settlement.
What are Andrew Jackson's views on these Native Americans?
Based on this document whose interests were the U.S. government really looking after?
Comparing this document to the Cartoon on Andrew Jackson does his language towards Indians match a fatherly figure?
Based on this document whose interests were the U.S. government really looking after?
Comparing this document to the Cartoon on Andrew Jackson does his language towards Indians match a fatherly figure?
What type of power did this act give the U.S. government in their control and power over the movement and settlement of Native Americans?
How did this document affect Indians who were already living in the areas where the removed Indians were being moved to?
What rights did the Native Americans have based on this act?
How did this document affect Indians who were already living in the areas where the removed Indians were being moved to?
What rights did the Native Americans have based on this act?
How does this speech to the Native Americans compare with Andrew Jackson's message given to congress?
How would this speech not conflict with the cartoon of Andrew Jackson as a father figure to the Native Americans |
What does this article show of the settlers views towards the Native Americans?
Does this article describe any opposition to their removal? |
Both of these two paintings show the effects that the journey had on them.
In the first picture what do you think that the weather was like?
In the second picture how was the weather affecting the Native Americans on their journey?
In the first picture what do you think that the weather was like?
In the second picture how was the weather affecting the Native Americans on their journey?
How does this map describe the distribution of Indians in the Southeast which would conflict with the expansion of U.S. Settlers moving West?
|
In this painting what feelings do you see from the effects that the weather has taken on them?
How and why do you think that the size of the groups changed from these three paintings to this final one? |
The Title for this cartoon is Andrew Jackson Father of the Native Americans.
Based on only this cartoon how do you think that he feels about the Native Americans? How does this cartoon match with Andrew Jackson's speeches to the Native Americans and to Congress? |
The link above contains a collection of stories from family members about their experiences on the Trail of Tears, what it was like before they left, and when they arrived in Oklahoma.
|