Indian Removal Flashcards
What were some initial justifications for Indian removal (3)
- Indians living close to whites got the ‘vices not the virtues’ of civilisation
- Hunters failed to make proper use of the land
- Right of discovery was more important than the right of ‘limited temporal occupancy’
Alexis de Toqueville on the removal
‘It is impossible to destroy men with more respect for the laws of humanity’
The different groups of Native Americans
- Chickasaws
- Choctaws
- Cherokee
- Seminoles
- Creeks
What was the culture of the Native Indians?
Called Mississippian Culture
- Permanent villages
- Agricultural economy
- chiefdoms (heirarchical social structure)
- Community> individual
What was the significance of British dominance over vying French/Spanish colonial powers in the 18th century
- ‘set in motion a series of events which culminated in Indian removal in the 19th century’
Initially, how did the British relate to the native Indians?
- sought trade relations and military alliances
- promising leather market due to large herds
- with time, trading in European goods –> dependence on European goods
- sought allies with Indians in colonial conflicts. Bribed chiefs –> destroyed community values
EVIDENCE
- Rival tribes may already have been provided with guns, which made it necessary for all others to have guns
Why did the British need such large areas
- Scattered settlement wouldn’t be suitable
- Large areas necessary for centralised authority
- Large numbers wanting to come over from UK
- Large amounts of land neccesary for farming
Pull factors for southern-North America
- potential for rice and tobacco farming
- Coton production rose exponentially throughout 19th century to peak in 1860s
What rights did the Indian’s have to their land, according to the British
- transitory right to occupation
- British had right of preemption because they discovered North America (John Cabot, Columbus)
- Indians were hunter gatherers who wandered the lands had no permanent dwelling place therefore didn’t own it
How did the British initially attempt to seize land from the Indians? What problem did they encounter?
METHOD
- Sought to legitimise the acquisition of land through treaties
- Land either given, by treaty, or relinquished as ‘war reparations
PROBLEM
- American Indians only recognised an individual’s right to cede land to another.
- Despite hierarchical model in Mississippian culture, wasn’t possible for a chief to cede a tribe’s land
–> British attempted to appoint chiefs as representatives with that authority
The beginning of Indian Removal: The Westward Frontier
- Rarely ‘shared’ land - Indians ceded, left, and whites moved in
- Indian’s tended to move/be moved Westward, creating a ‘frontier’
- George III formalises boundary in 1963 after French-Indian war, appoints official agents to interact with Indians
- -> Americans inherit this, and the right of preemption, from British after independence
Articles of the Confederation and Indian policy
- 1779-1789
- Federal gvt. continue to regulate trade and travel in Indian nations - though states often conducted their own business
- Once Indians moved on, surveyors divide up land into cheap tracts to encourage cheap settlement
The Federal Constitution (1789) and Indian Policy
- Under George Washington
- Indian affairs the responsibility of the War Department
- Henry Knox, Secretary of War, advocates propietorship and federal, not state, control.
- Indian Trade and Intercourse Acts
- Regulated trade and travel and reaffirmed federal control
- Money put aside for civilisation of the Indians
Why did some Americans have a desire to civilise the Indians, and how did they go about this, in the late 18th century?
How successful were they?
Includes historiography (Perdu)
- Partly because of civilised they would give up traditional lifestyles and, therefore, their land
- But, Perdu argues, ‘genuine altruism motivated many whites’
HOWEVER - Most federal officials viewed the civilisation programme as a means to an end
- Federal gvt. provided funding for teaching Indians to be domestic/agricultural, and for missionary expeditions
SUCCESS?
- Little or no religious change, and Creeks resisted the establishment of a school
- However, some indoctrinated with Western values/cultural beliefs
- Leaders increasingly indoctrinated and others followed them
Did Indians ‘welcome’ early attempts to civilise them? (Perdu)
- Perdu argues some Indians did
- ‘Individualistic economic system’ appealed to aggressive instinct previously played out in war and hunting
- Descendants of American men and Indian women already partially acculturated
- Many preferred to maintain traditional ways of living and cultural values, which surprised Americans who had believed that ‘civilising’ them would be simple
How did American acquisition of Indian land become more forceful in the early 19th century?
Two methods
METHOD ONE, ALLOW THE INDIANS TO FALL INTO DEBT
- Government authorises creation of trading posts, and then allow Indian’s to trade excessively and come into debt
- When Indians in debt, gvt. demanded payment in land
EVIDENCE
- Factory built in Chickasaw lands in 1802
- Within three years, Chickasaws had $12 000 debt
- –> ceeded territory north of Tennessee River
METHOD TWO, BRIBARY AND EXPLOTIATION OF TRIBAL FACTIONALISM
- Dealt with cooperative elements in a tribe in the name of the entire tribe
- Bribed especially cooperative chiefs
EVIDENCE
- Cherokee Removal Crisis 1806-9, Americans negotiated with Alabama and Georgia, where Cherokee’s deemed to be more assimilable than settlements to the North
- Secret treaty promised money to some lower-town chiefs
- 1825, William McIntosh, progressive creek, bribed to cede land –> executed by Indian state
How did the Southern Indians respond to attempts from the Americans to seize their lands in the early 19th century?
What was the consequences?
1) Adopted to American political systems
- Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws centralise gvt., accountable political leaders
EVIDENCE
- Cherokees establish a national police force and an executive committee; murder becomes crime, not just a family matter to be resolved with blood vengeance
- 1826, Choctaws establish a legal code and a
CONSEQUENCES
- 1) threat to indian culture
- 2) civil war in 1813. Not all agreed with Europeanisation
- Creeks allied with US vs “Red Sticks” (anti-Europeanisation)
- –> Many Red Sticks go to join Seminoles in Florida
The belief that exposing Native Americans to civilisation was a corrupting influence?
What policy would consequently be adopted by the Americans?
Significant turning point
- Indians were living beyond their means and getting into debt
- Indians began to buy slaves
- Gambling
- ALCOHOLISM
CONSEQUENCES
- The new appreciation of how difficult it would be to civilise the Indians troubled those who had sought to ‘help’ them and vindicated those who only wanted their land
- -> Removing the Indians would allow access to the land they had occupied and prevent them being corrupted further
LOUISIANA PURCHASE
- 1803, Jefferson purchases large tract of land West of Mississippi
- Indians could now be moved here
- –> “Thus the U.S. Governments removal policy officially was born”
Louisiana Territorial Act, 1804
authorises the president to arrange the transfer of the right of occupation from lands held by Indians in the East to land offered to Indians West of the Mississippi
