There is a widely held opinion among the overwhelming majority of historians that Cherokee Indians have lived in North America since prehistoric times. However, these people, who can be rightly considered the true owners of American content, were mercilessly removed (probably “banished” would be more appropriate in this case) from their own land. If we try to trace the development of this process, it is quite possible for us to say that it began in the seventeenth century and it should not be necessarily associated with the development of the United States. This statement can be substantiated by the following facts: first encounters between Cherokee Indians and European settlers took place in 1654. It would not be a far-fetched conclusion to say that this process could not be avoided in any way, because Cherokee lands always attracted the attention of European colonists and it inevitably led to the conflict.
Speaking about the major threat to Cherokee sovereignty, we can say that it was closely connected with the rising influence of Europeans (in this case we may easily substitute the term “Europeans” by the United States) in America. The question arises, whether it was not possible for these two sides to live in peace and harmony. Naturally, under some circumstances, it could be done, but the increasing population of the United States would eventually lead to the removal of Cherokee Indians from their land. To some extent, it can be characterized as the “natural selection”
Perhaps, it would be better to substantiate this statement with some examples. Overall, it is worth mentioning that the first document that imposed some limitations on the rights of all Indians in general, and Cherokee in particular was the Treaty of Paris, much of the Indian lands were given to the United States. According to this document, the American government had the “sole and exclusive right of … managing all affairs with the Indians’ (Perdue, 74) It should be taken into account that it was done with no regard to the opinion of the native people. Nevertheless, it was just a preliminary stage of more drastic changes. Thus, we can arrive at the conclusion that such phenomenon as Cherokee (or even Indian) Removal has very deep roots.
Our major task is to discuss this process within the timeframe of the nineteenth century. For this purpose, we should analyze the historical documents that clearly defined the relationships between the American government and Cherokee Indians.
The relationships between Cherokee Indians and the American government testified at the beginning of the nineteenth century. For example, the State of Georgia adopted certain acts of legislation, which deprived Cherokees of their rights, and practically compelled them to leave their lands. This tension resulted in the case “Cherokee nation vs. Georgia”. However, Cherokees managed to prove that they were a “political society” in other words autonomous. The court decision was a very ambiguous one, because, according to it Cherokees were a “denominated domestic dependent nation”, however, the state had no right to remove these people from their lands (Perdue, 80). Very soon, the American government managed to find an excuse for the removal.
The most prominent is the so-called Indian Removal Act. This act of legislation was adopted in 1830 by president Andrew Jackson. This law caused a deep resonance among the American people because it surely contradicted the basic principles of the United States. However, some Sothern States, especially Georgia supported this law, because it allowed them to resolve the sharp dispute that the state had with Cherokee Indians for a very long time. This act of legislation was rather controversial; the main controversy consisted of the following: Cherokee Indians were supposed to move from their lands voluntarily; however, as it turned out, this Indian removal could not be done without force.
Speaking about this document, we can say that it does not actually explain why Cherokee Indians had to remove from their land. Probably, because it was quite obvious to every participant that Cherokees fertile lands were a tidbit for the increasing number of white European farmers. Additionally, analyzing this document we can see that president Andrew Jackson places emphasis on the fact that this process is an “exchange” (Perdue, 133) It is quite possible for us to ask a question about whether this exchange was equivalent. Certainly, the lands, which were granted to Cherokee Indians, could not be compared with those ones that they owned long before any European set foot on the American continent.
Moreover, in his statement Andrew Jackson that this bill was adopted for the sake of Cherokee Indians. It is a very disputable statement because Cherokees could hardly imagine that it was done for their own good. It was supposed, the natives could make full use of the lands in Georgia and that it would be more prudent for the white farmers.
Another historical document that we are going to discuss is the so-called Treaty of New Echota. According to this contract, Indians Cherokee was entitled to the losses that they could sustain in connection with the relocation. Moreover, it was explicitly stated that, that the Indian Territory, which is modern Oklahoma would be an adequate substitution for the lands in Georgia,
It should be taken into consideration that this treaty cannot be viewed as legal. One of the provisions, which are aimed at proving that this document has some legitimate power, says that the “authorized delegation and empowered delegation” entered into this treaty (Perdue, 123). It is worth mentioning that this delegation consisted only of twenty persons. It is quite possible to ask a question, about whether such a delegation had the right to speak on behalf of Cherokee Indians.
According to this treaty, the American people and Cherokees lived in an atmosphere of “perpetual peace and friendship”. In addition, the American government was entitled to “instruct” Cherokees as to “treaty stipulations”. Thus, it becomes obvious that this contract or treaty was one-sided, and the American government treated the natives as inferior, who practically had no possibility to protect their civil rights.
Overall, the above-mentioned historical clearly indicated the attitude of the American government towards the natives.
Thus, having analyzed these three documents or rather acts of legislation, we can draw the conclusion that the increasing influence of Europeans imposed a major threat to Cherokees sovereignty. The government managed to find a legitimate excuse to force Indians from their lands. De jure, this removal was considered an equivalent exchange but in fact, it was a seizure of territory, which could not be justified by any international law.
Bibliography
Theda Perdue, Michael D. Green The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents. Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press, 1995.