Indian Removal Was or Wasn’t unjustified
Written by: Jerah Green
The first people in America were the Indians, they know and cherished that land. We took their land when we first came and then congress wanted to take more and more, but is it justified that they should push them out again. That is what the United States congress was debating. The U.S. had promised that land to the Indians, then they try to break that promise. That doesn’t make them as Americans look very good or trustworthy. Therefore the Indian Removal act was unjustified.
Some of the congressman feel that it would be better for the Native Americans to be relocated. Even the president at the time thought it would be, “ The removal of [these] tribes...would not only shield them from impending ruin, but promote their welfare and happiness…[ if this doesn’t happen ] their degradation and extermination will be inevitable.” ( President James Monroe, one of his last messages to congress.) The congress may have felt that it would be better for the Native Americans but they wish to keep their land. If they had been moved then they would have had to readjust to a total different life. That land is all they have ever known, they won’t know how to farm, or survive on new land. That is just …show more content…
When we pushed them out it made us look selfish and greedy, we should have made some sort of arrangement so they could stay. “God, in his providence, planted these tribes on this continent. ...We cannot rightfully complete the cession of their lands or take them by violence, if their constant be withheld…” ( Theodore Frelinghuysen, Document 5 ) Theodore Frelinghuysen is right, god put them here so they should be aloud to stay. The congress should be helping them and letting them stay. That is why pushing them out is not good for American
Written by: Jerah Green
The first people in America were the Indians, they know and cherished that land. We took their land when we first came and then congress wanted to take more and more, but is it justified that they should push them out again. That is what the United States congress was debating. The U.S. had promised that land to the Indians, then they try to break that promise. That doesn’t make them as Americans look very good or trustworthy. Therefore the Indian Removal act was unjustified.
Some of the congressman feel that it would be better for the Native Americans to be relocated. Even the president at the time thought it would be, “ The removal of [these] tribes...would not only shield them from impending ruin, but promote their welfare and happiness…[ if this doesn’t happen ] their degradation and extermination will be inevitable.” ( President James Monroe, one of his last messages to congress.) The congress may have felt that it would be better for the Native Americans but they wish to keep their land. If they had been moved then they would have had to readjust to a total different life. That land is all they have ever known, they won’t know how to farm, or survive on new land. That is just …show more content…
When we pushed them out it made us look selfish and greedy, we should have made some sort of arrangement so they could stay. “God, in his providence, planted these tribes on this continent. ...We cannot rightfully complete the cession of their lands or take them by violence, if their constant be withheld…” ( Theodore Frelinghuysen, Document 5 ) Theodore Frelinghuysen is right, god put them here so they should be aloud to stay. The congress should be helping them and letting them stay. That is why pushing them out is not good for American