Wounded Knee: An Unjustified Massacre

Note from the Author: Some information and images may not be suitable for children.    

          The Native Americans were faced with forced Americanization, oppression, and genocide by the white Americans during the late 1800s. The United States government’s reaction to the gathering of Lakota Sioux at Wounded Knee was unjustified and genocidal. The Seventh Calvary sought a way to get revenge on Sitting Bull and the Lakota following their defeat at the Battle of Little Bighorn. The United States government used the Ghost Dance religion as a reason to arrest and kill Native American leaders that they deemed troublemakers. The result was the senseless death of hundreds of Native Americans on December 29, 1890.

The Battle of Little Bighorn

            The United States Calvary and a couple of Native American tribes fought against each other during the Battle of Little Bighorn on June 25 through June 26, 1876. The Sioux and Cheyenne tribes had grown tired of the increased presence of white men on their reservations after gold had been found. In response, the tribes, led by Sitting Bull, met in Montana to make a stand against the white men.[1] The United States military sent three dispatches of military to deal with the defiant Native Americans.[2] Colonel George Custer led the Seventh Calvary during the battle.

            On June 25, 1876, the United States Army discovered a Native American village not far from the Little Bighorn River. Custer contemplated using the element of surprise to attack the village, but decided against it since Native American scouts already knew where they were.[3] Instead, Custer decided to divide his men into three battalions and sent them in various directions to attack the Natives directly. According to the article The Battle of Little Bighorn, 1876, “he [Custer] did not realize that the number of warriors in the village numbered three times his strength.”[4] Custer and his men had found themselves in a dangerous situation as the Native-American village became aware of their presence.

            Custer and his battalion, of the Seventh Calvary, fought several skirmishes against the Natives. Custer and his men found themselves surrounded by the warrior Crazy Horse and a group of Oglala Sioux.[5] George Herendon reported that “we stayed in the bush about three hours, and I could hear heavy firing below in the river, apparently about two miles distant. I did not know who it was, but knew the Indians were fighting some of our men, and learned afterward it was Custer's command.” [6] Custer and his men made their last stand surrounded by hundreds of Natives. Custer and his men were ultimately killed by the Natives.[7] The other two battalions of the Seventh Calvary had been unable to come to their aid.

Ghost Dance Religion

Native Americans grew restless with their living situations and desired a change. The article Wounded Knee I explained, “deprived of their homelands, their revolts suppressed, and their way of life besieged, many Plains Indians dreamed of restoring a vanished past, free of hunger, disease, and bitter warfare.”[8] Native American messiahs, or mystics, prophesied a change for the Natives in the future.[9] In 1889, a new Native American mystic’s teaching began to gain popularity among the tribes in the Western United States. Wovoka, the mystic, sparked hope in the hearts of the Native Americans for a return of the old ways of life.

Wovoka’s teachings were specific on the events that would take place during this prophesied event. Patti Jo King in The Truth About the Wounded Knee Massacre stated that Wovoka told of, “an age that promised an end to Euro-American oppression and a return to tribal autonomy, abundance and spiritual renewal.”[10] In order to bring about those changes, Wovoka’s followers were instructed to perform rituals: such as traditional dances, prayer, and rites.[11] These rituals were supposed to cause drastic changes throughout the United States that would benefit the Natives. A flood was supposed to cover the Earth and kill the white men. [12] In addition, the buffalo, Great Spirit, and ancestors were supposed to return.[13]

The new religious movement became known as the Ghost Dance. The religion got its name from the ritualistic dancing performed by its adherents. In addition, the Ghost Dance followers wore special Ghost Dance shirts during the ritual performances. The Wounded Knee I article indicated that, “wearing special Ghost Dance shirts, fabricated from white muslin and decorated with red fringes and painted symbols, dancers would spin in a circle until they became so dizzy that they entered into a trance.”[14] The religion, combined with Native American traditions and hope for change, quickly spread through various western tribes and then around the country.[15]

Sitting Bull’s Death

The United States government labeled Native American leaders, such as Sitting Bull, troublemakers.[16] Sitting Bull had been involved in a few confrontations between the United States military and Native Americans during the Indian Wars. One of those confrontations had been during the Battle of Little Bighorn. Sitting Bull had returned to the Lakotas, to the Standing Rock Reservation which was located in both North and South Dakota.  

            The Ghost Dance religion made the United States government uneasy and they feared another Native American upraising. White Americans became afraid as the religion spread across the country. James McLaughlin noted that, “‘The ‘Messiah’ craze has been inaugurated by these leaders for the purpose of exciting the Indians, and as a cover for their meetings to arrange for an outbreak.” [17] Sitting Bull was one of the leaders that had been mistakenly identified as a Ghost Dance leader. [18] One of the Indian Agents at Standing Rock asked for military assistance and protection against the Sioux. [19] Later, an order was issued for the arrests of Sitting Bull and numerous other Native-American leaders.

            Officers prepared to arrest Sitting Bull, on December 15, 1890, at the reservation and prevent him from fleeing his cabin.[20] Sitting Bull resisted the arrest and a scuffle broke out between the officers and several Native Americans. Sitting Bull and other Natives were shot and killed.[21] Several of the offers were killed also. Word of his death spread quickly to other reservations, which put the Natives on high alert.

Wounded Knee

Lakota Chief Big Foot, also known as Spotted Elk, feared that what had happened to Sitting Bull would happen to his people. He and his followers of men, women, and children gathered together and fled to the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota on December 28, 1890.[22] According to the article Wounded Knee II, “they were pursued by U.S. forces including units of the 7th Cavalry, the regiment that Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse had defeated at the battle of the Little Bighorn [sic].” [23] Big Foot surrendered when the U.S. troops approached in order to protect his people. They were surrounded and led to an area by the Wounded Knee Creek.[24]

On December 29, 1890, Big Foot and the Sioux warriors sat in a powwow in their camp, which was surrounded by the U.S. Military.[25] Big Foot grew weaker from pneumonia, while a medicine man performed traditional dances.[26] Colonel James W. Forsyth was overseeing the surrender of weapons at the camp and ordered the medicine man to stop, but the medicine man refused to do so.[27] A witness, Philip Wells, indicated that when the weapons were obtained the men were separated from the women and children.[28] The Native warriors and U.S. Troops were on edge due to the intense situation.

There are discrepancies on what initially happened to cause the first gun shot, but reports are consistent on that it was initiated by a Native American. Turning Hawk reported that, “there was a crazy man, a young man of very bad influence and in fact a nobody, among that bunch of Indians fired his gun, and of course the firing of a gun must have been the breaking of a military rule of some sort, because immediately the soldiers returned fire and indiscriminate killing followed.”[29] Other reports suggested that the man was deaf or that he resisted giving up his weapon. Regardless of the cause, that man was the first to fire a shot and was responsible for the death of a U.S. officer. [30]

The scene erupted into chaos following the first shot. Natives drew their knives and scrambled for nearby weapons. Spotted Horse explained that, “the soldiers immediately shot back at the Natives.” [31] Other Natives drew out hidden weapons and began to return fire at the soldiers.[32] Several Lakota men tried to escape into a ravine, but were surrounded and killed. [33]

The Hotchkiss gun, an early model machine gun capable of firing continuous rounds, had the most significant impact on the unarmed Natives. The Hotchkiss sprayed bullets into teepees and on unarmed women and children.[34] Women sought safety, but mistakenly ran into an open field and later a ravine, where they were killed.[35] American Horse described, “right near the flag of truce a mother was shot down with her infant; the child not knowing that its mother was dead was still nursing, and that especially was a very sad sight.”[36] Pregnant women, mothers, babies, and children of various ages were all killed, even after they had survived the initial gunfire.

            After the massacre a significant number of bodies were scattered across the landscape; a large majority were Lakota. The Massacre at Wounded Knee article state that, approximately 300 Sioux had been killed, including Chief Big Foot.[37] There were only approximately twenty-five U.S. soldiers that had been killed during the event.[38] The injured soldiers were either taken or left to die in freezing temperatures as a blizzard covered the region.[39] Approximately fifty Natives were taken captive.[40]

Analysis

            The massacre that took place at Wounded Knee Creek had a larger impact than just the deaths of hundreds of Lakota Sioux. The article Massacre at Wounded Knee indicated that, “scattered fighting continued, but the massacre at Wounded Knee effectively squelched the Ghost Dance movement and ended the Indian Wars.”[41] The Native American people and their spirit had been broken by such a violent act. The only way that they continued to fight was in the court room and by holding onto their remaining traditions, instead of the fighting on a battlefield.

            Another question that was raised about the Ghost Dance religion was if had been used as an excuse to arrest or eliminate suspected Native American leaders. [42] After the religious movement began, there had been concern over public safety if the religious became violent. Colin Calloway in First Peoples explained that, “Wovoka preached a religion that promised the return of the old ways that would reunite its practitioners with departed ancestors if they abstained from alcohol, lived in peace, and followed a prescribed ritual, including dancing in a circle called the Ghost Dance.”[43] The Ghost Dancers believed in peace and the protection of their people against white man’s bullets.

The Seventh Calvary’s involvement during the event raises questions about whether or not the massacre was premeditated. Colin Calloway noted that the Seventh Calvary was, “perhaps still smarting from their defeat at the Little Bighorn [sic] fourteen years before.” [44] Other sources suggest that it was an act of revenge against the Sioux for their involvement in the Battle of Little Bighorn, which caused to the deaths of numerous members of the Seventh Calvary. [45] It is possible that the unarmed men, women, and children were murdered, which is why General Nelson Miles obtained a court martial for numerous officers that took part in the massacre.[46] Instead a decision being made on whether or not the officers were guilty the soldiers were given Medals of Honor.[47]

            The United States government and the Seventh Calvary were unjustified in their actions at Wounded Knee. The fact that the Seventh Calvary had been defeated during the Battle of Little Bighorn and the use of force on unarmed Natives suggest that it was an act of revenge. The United States military had no proof that Sitting Bull or Big Foot were Ghost Dance leaders, but chose to have them arrested anyway indicates that they were looking for an excuse to remove a potential threat. The actions taken against the Lakota at Wounded Knee were senseless acts of violence, particularly when the number of women and children that had been killed is taken into account. The massacre was the end to the Indian Wars, but also to a Native American religion and a way of life.

---

[1] “The Battle of Little Bighorn, 1876,” EyeWitness to History, accessed February 8, 2017, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/custer.htm
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] George Herendon quoted in “The Battle of Little Bighorn, 1876,” EyeWitness to History, accessed February 8, 2017, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/custer.htm
[7] “Battle of Little Bighorn,” National Park Service, accessed February 8, 2017, https://www.nps.gov/libi/learn/historyculture/battle-of-the-little-bighorn.htm
[8] “Wounded Knee I,” Digital History, accessed January 23, 2017, http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3503
[9] Colin Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian
History (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 314.
[10] Patti Jo King, “The Truth About the Wounded Knee Massacre,” Indian Country Media Network, last modified December 30, 2016, https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/history/events/the-truth-about-the-wounded-knee-massacre/
[11] “Wounded Knee I,” Digital History.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Calloway, First Peoples, 315.
[16] Ibid., 315.
[17] James McLaughlin, “A Memorandum from James McLaughlin, Indian Agent at Pine Ridge Agency, Regarding the Reasons for the Ghost Dance Uprising, November 6, 1890.” Digital Public Library of America. Accessed January 24, 2017. https://dp.la/primary-source-sets/sources/745
[18] “Massacre at Wounded Knee, 1890," EyeWitness to History, accessed January 23, 2017, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/knee.htm
[19] Ibid.
[20] Calloway, First Peoples, 315.
[21] “Wounded Knee I,” Digital History.
[22] Turning Hawk, quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee,” PBS, accessed January 24, 2017, http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm
[23] “Wounded Knee II,” Digital History, accessed January 23, 2017, http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3504
[24] Ibid.
[25] “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” EyeWitness to History.
[26] Philip Wells, “Ninety-Six Years among the Indians of the Northwest," quoted in "Massacre at Wounded Knee, 1890," EyeWitness to History, accessed January 23, 2017, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/knee.htm
[27] Ibid.
[28] Turning Hawk, “Lakota Accounts,” PBS.
[29] Ibid.
[30] Spotted Horse, quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee,” PBS, accessed January 24, 2017, http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm
[31] Ibid.
[32] Wells, “Ninety-Six Years,” EyeWitness to History.
[33] Turning Hawk, “Lakota Accounts,” PBS.
[34] “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” EyeWitness to History.
[35] Turning Hawk, “Lakota Accounts,” PBS.
[36] American Horse, quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee,” PBS,
accessed January 24, 2017, http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm
[37] “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” EyeWitness to History.
[38] “Wounded Knee,” History, accessed January 23, 2017, http://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/wounded-knee
[39] “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” EyeWitness to History.
[40] “Wounded Knee II,” Digital History.
[41] “Massacre at Wounded Knee,” EyeWitness to History.
[42] King, “The Truth About the Wounded Knee Massacre,” Indian Country Media Network.
[43] Calloway, First Peoples, 314.
[44] Ibid., 315.
[45] Wounded Knee,” History.
[46] “Wounded Knee II,” Digital History.
[47] King, “The Truth About the Wounded Knee Massacre,” Indian Country Media Network.

Bibliography

American Horse. Quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee.” PBS.

Accessed January 24, 2017. http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm

“The Battle of Little Bighorn, 1876.” EyeWitness to History. Accessed February 8, 2017. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/custer.htm

“Battle of Little Bighorn.” National Park Service. Accessed February 8, 2017. https://www.nps.gov/libi/learn/historyculture/battle-of-the-little-bighorn.htm

           

Calloway, Colin. First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History. Boston:

            Bedford/St. Martin’s. 2008.

Herendon, George. Quoted in “The Battle of Little Bighorn, 1876.” EyeWitness to History. Accessed February 8, 2017. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/custer

King, Patti Jo. “The Truth About the Wounded Knee Massacre.” Indian Country Media Network. Last modified December 30, 2016. https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/history/events/the-truth-about-the-wounded-knee-massacre/

"Massacre at Wounded Knee, 1890." EyeWitness to History. Accessed January 23, 2017. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/knee.htm

McLaughlin, James. “A Memorandum from James McLaughlin, Indian Agent at Pine Ridge Agency, Regarding the Reasons for the Ghost Dance Uprising, November 6, 1890.” Digital Public Library of America. Accessed January 24, 2017.  https://dp.la/primary-source-sets/sources/745

Spotted Horse. Quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee.” PBS. Accessed January 24, 2017. http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm

Turning Hawk. Quoted in “Lakota Accounts of the Massacre at Wounded Knee.” PBS. Accessed January 24, 2017. http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/eight/wklakota.htm

Wells, Philip. "Ninety-six Years among the Indians of the Northwest." Quoted in "Massacre at Wounded Knee, 1890." EyeWitness to History. Accessed January 23, 2017. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/knee.htm

“Wounded Knee.” History. Accessed January 23, 2017. http://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/wounded-knee

“Wounded Knee I.” Digital History. Accessed January 23, 2017. http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3503

“Wounded Knee II.” Digital History. Accessed January 23, 2017. http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3504

Andrew Jackson: The Presidency that Led to an American Genocide

           President Andrew Jackson was a promoter for the removal of natives from east of the Mississippi. He and his administration set into motion events that led to the removal of tens of thousands of natives from their territories. The federal and state governments pressured the natives and worked to forcefully remove them in order to gain access to their lands for settlement purposes and gold. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 brought about a treacherous answer to the Indian Problem. Through Jackson’s removal policy, and the cooperation of the state and federal governments, the Cherokee Nation saw the genocide thousands of people during the Trail of Tears.
            The American government had a history of negotiations with the natives from the foundation of the new independent country. In 1791, Treaty of Holston was signed by the Cherokee and the United States after negotiations for a future of peace between the two nations.[1] Despite the peaceful outcome of the negotiation, the question remained on the minds of white Americans as to what should be done with the natives. President Thomas Jefferson suggested that the only way to civilize the natives was by reducing the amount of lands they occupied.[2]
            The native problem was a complicated question to find an answer to, until it was suggested that the natives be removed from their land and moved westward. Colin G. Calloway in First Peoples noted that, “the policy of removing Indian peoples from their eastern homelands to the West was implemented in the late 1820s and 1830s, but it originated in earlier periods when Americans had considered various solutions to the problem of what to do with Indians in the eastern United States.”[3] The main target of the removal policies were tribes that owned significant acreage such as the Cherokee, Creeks, Chickasaws, and Choctaws.[4]
            Andrew Jackson became the first president to vigorously pursue the option of Indian removal from east of the Mississippi River. His history with natives began long before his presidency, when James Madison gave him command of the Tennessee militia during the War of 1812, the Creek War, and the First Seminole War. Daniel Feller in The Jacksonian Promise indicated that, “Jackson’s memory of war against Indians allied with the Spanish and British, his hunger for expansion, and his own residence in the southwest all led him to feel the grievance of stymied state governments and land-hungry frontiersmen more than the plight of threatened tribes.”[5] Jackson often acted on that hunger during his command of American troops.
            Jackson’s experience with natives was not, however, all negative. Sometime during the War of 1812, Jackson’s men found a Creek boy, of approximately three years old, among the deceased.[6] Jackson sent the boy home to his wife Rachel and they unofficially adopted him. According to the Andrew Jackson’s Hermitage website, “This boy, Lyncoya, (c1811-1828), may have originally been intended as merely a companion for Andrew Jr. [ward of the Jacksons’], but Jackson soon took a strong interest in him.”[7] Lyncoya died of tuberculosis as a teenager shortly before Jackson’s election.[8]
           In addition to adopting a native child, Jackson was also saved by his Cherokee allies during the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, on March 27, 1814. The War of 1812 and Indian Wars stated that, “Chief Junaluska, [was] the Cherokee ally who led 500 Native American men in support of the Americans and saved Jackson’s life.”[9] Jackson even promised that there would be continuous peace between him and the Cherokee after the incident.[10] His promise, however, was short lived and he sought to destroy his native foes.
            Jackson found his hate toward the natives renewed during the First Seminole War when President James Monroe gave him orders, in December 1817, to eliminate the Seminole Indians. Charles Sellers in The Market Revolution acknowledged that, “when a band of Seminole Indians resisted removal from their ancestral lands just north of the boundary and massacred a party of whites, Jackson was ordered to pursue them into Florida if necessary.”[11] Jackson took his order to the extreme and pursued the Seminoles into Spanish Florida where, he captured and killed them.[12]
            By the mid 1820s the situation in the Georgia’s Cherokee Territory began to become hostile. White Americans were envious of the Cherokee lands and often attempted to settle on them illegally. Colin G. Calloway agreed that, “their very success and prosperity only increased pressure from neighbors eager to get their hands on Cherokee land.”[13] That pressure increased after gold was discovered in the Cherokee Territory, in 1827.[14] Afterward, the Cherokee began to experience difficulties with the Georgia state government.
            The state of Georgia began to encroach on the Cherokee tribal government’s authority over their territory. Calloway confirmed that, “in December [1827] the Georgia legislature passed a resolution asserting its sovereignty over Cherokee lands within the state’s borders.”[15] Georgia sought to do all they could to drive the natives from their lands, through the destruction of the Cherokee Nation’s infrastructure, by applying extreme laws on the natives.[16] The Cherokee Nation responded with a political war, instead of the expected violent attacks on white settlements.
            The Cherokee Nation had complied with the wishes of the United States to make them into a civilized culture. The Cherokee adopted the English language, American clothing, and the Christian religion. A census from 1825 indicated that the Cherokee, “owned 33 grist mills, 13 saw mills, one powder mill, 29 blacksmith shops, two tan yards, 762 looms, 2,486 spinning wheels, 172 wagons, 2,923 plows, 7,683 horses, 22,531 cattle, 46,732 pigs, 2,566 sheep.”[17] Some of the natives had even surpassed the white men by learning a second language and obtaining their own slaves.[18]
Their advancements extended to the tribal government.
            The Cherokee culture and government was altered when the tribal government adopted a written constitution, in 1827. Charles Sellers added that, “the Cherokees adopted a United States-style constitution with bicameral legislature, three-tiered judicial system, county administrations, and tribal police.”[19] The Cherokee government diplomatically petitioned their right for protection from the United States, according to the Treaty of Holston, against the white settlers and state of Georgia.[20] Georgia, however, did not plan to stop their advances into the Cherokee Territory.
            Andrew Jackson’s election in 1828 sealed the fate of the natives. Sellers argued that, “the Cherokees’ fiercer resistance under their new constitution was doomed by Jackson’s election.”[21] The American citizens that opposed to the presence of the natives felt that with Jackson’s election the removal of the natives was possible.[22] The Indian-haters were correct; during Jackson’s presidency he pushed his policy on Indian removal forward.
            Jackson viewed the natives through narrow eyes. He saw them as, “racially inferior and incapable of change.”[23] He saw himself a superior to the natives and a father figure of sorts.[24] In addition, Jackson felt that his removal policy was the only alternative to destroying the natives completely.[25] The natives thought that they could appeal to President Jackson for help against the imposing white Americans.
            The natives, however, soon learned that the new president would not prevent the states from overstepping their authority. Instead, Jackson supported the rights of the states and their sovereignty over the native territories. Sellers pointed out that, “the President’s novel contention that the federal government could not restrain state sovereignty over Indians absolved him from the consequences and allowed him to strike a magnanimous posture.”[26] Jackson went farther to deny the sovereignty of the native nations.
            During Jackson’s First Annual Message to Congress in December 1829, he spoke on his views about the natives. “In his first message to Congress he repudiated it [Indian sovereignty] outright.”[27] Jackson had no intentions of aiding the natives, but instead sought to remove them to the west of the Mississippi River. After Jackson proposed the Indian Removal Act, he sought to prepare lands west of the Mississippi River for Indian removal.[28] The land that was set aside was in an area far from American citizens, in Oklahoma, where they could be left to their own vices.
            In the spring of 1830, the Indian Removal Act went into effect. On April 14, 1830 the United States Senate obtained a majority vote in favor of the act. One month later, “a close vote of 102-97 authorized the President to exchange public land beyond the Mississippi for eastern tribal domains, to reimburse removing Indians for improvements, and to pay for their transportation.”[29] On May 28, 1830, the Indian Removal Act was signed by President Andrew Jackson.
            The purpose of the Indian Removal Act was to legally justify the removal of natives from their lands. Chapter CXLVIII of The Indian Removal Act of 1830 declared that it was, “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.”[30] The act also gave Jackson the ability to negotiate the removal treaties himself. To make certain that his removal policy succeeded Jackson used dishonorable tactics in order to make the resistant tribes sign the treaties.
            Jackson’s tactics are often considered disgraceful. Feller believed that, “Jackson’s bribing and browbeating Indians into surrendering their rights and territory made a mockery of negotiation; the treaties he procured by such means disgraced national faith and honor.”[31] The response to Jackson’s tactics varied depending on the tribe in question. Choctaws and Chickasaws willingly signed treaties for removal, because of the increased pressure by state and federal governments.[32] There were other tribes that refused to leave their lands.
            On December 6, 1830, Jackson gave his Third Annual Message to Congress which addressed the recently passed Indian Removal Act. Jackson justified the removal as a positive move for whites and natives. Andrew Jackson in President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress ‘On Indian Removal’ (1830) described the removal as a way to:

           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.[33]

           In addition, Jackson tried to sugar coat the emigration west by indicating that the natives would be provided with a new place to live, new experiences, and a chance to improve themselves.[34] He attempted to justify his actions to the American people in a way that made the Indian Removal seem more humane.
            The Cherokee Nation was one of the tribal governments that sought to resist the removal from their lands. “When the state of Georgia seized Cherokee lands and dissolved tribal authority by extending its laws over their territory, the Indians turned to the Supreme Court.”[35] A half white Cherokee politician, John Ross, was determined to aid his people in fighting against the state of Georgia and removal. He hired an attorney general, William Wirt, to take the Cherokee’s case to court.[36]
            The 1831 Supreme Court case became known as the Cherokee Nation v. the State of Georgia. The Cherokee nation brought their case against Georgia stating that Georgia’s new laws threatened to destroy their society and take their lands.[37] Chief Justice John Marshall ruled against the Cherokee Nation and claimed that he had no jurisdiction, because of the nation’s status in relation to the United States.[38]
           John Marshall explained that the Cherokee Nation’s status was that of a dependent nation and that the Constitution gave the natives no rights in their situation with Georgia. Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia reported that:
    
            Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an questionable and,
            theretofore, unquestioned right to the lands they occupy until that
            right shall be a voluntary cession to our government, yet it may well
            be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the
            acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict           
            accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may more correctly,
            perhaps, be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a
            territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which
            must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession
            ceases. Meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation 
            to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian.[39]

            Marshall, however concluded that if he was wrong about the Cherokee Nation’s status than they could possibly have another trial.[40] The case would return in 1832 as the Worcester v. Georgia case.
            John Ridge gave a speech in Philadelphia about the Cherokee’s cooperation with advancements towards civilization, in 1832. He explained that they had closely modeled their new form of government after that of the Americans.[41]He also explained that his people copy everything that white men do. Ridge commented that, “You asked us to cultivate the earth, and we learn the mechanic arts: We did so.”[42] His efforts to show their progress were useless against the perception held by Jackson and his administration.
            From February through March 1832, the case of the Cherokee against Georgia was once again introduced to the Supreme Court as the Worcester v. Georgia case. Feller implied that the case “went further toward judicial protection for the beleaguered Cherokee.”[43] The Worcester v. Georgia case, however, brought about a positive ruling for the Cherokee. Chief Justice John Marshall voted in favor of the Cherokee and against the illegal acts of Georgia.[44]
            The case of Worcester v. Georgia also changed the status of the Cherokee Nation’s relationship to the United States. John Marshal in Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia (1831) And Worcester v. Georgia (1832) responded that:
           
            The Cherokee nation, then, is a distinct community, occupying its
            own territory with boundaries accurately described, in which the
            laws of Georgia can have no force, and which the citizens of
            Georgia have no right to enter but with the assent of the Cherokees
            themselves or in conformity with treaties and with the acts of
            Congress. The whole intercourse between the United States and
            this nation is, by our Constitution and laws, vested in the government
            of the United States. The act of the State of Georgia under which the
            plaintiff in error was prosecuted is consequently void, and the
            judgment a nullity.[45]
            
            According to the Constitution the Cherokee Nation had the rights of authority over their lands, regardless of what the state of Georgia thought. Georgia, the other states, and the federal government, however, intended to do as they pleased and ignored the ruling.[46]
           By 1832, the Creeks began relinquishing their lands to the United States as a result of the continuous pressure from the government. And by fall of that year, they had signed over their remaining lands east of the Mississippi River to the United States. Jackson’s policies must have been echoed in the hearts of Americans, because that November he was reelected president. The first two years of Jackson’s second term saw the signing of more treaties with tribes such as the Seminoles. In 1834, the situation the Cherokee faced was growing more serious as the division within the Nation grew over whether to leave or remain on their ancestral.
            On December 7, 1835, President Andrew Jackson gave his Seventh Annual Message to Congress. The topic was once again on Indian removal as he attempted to justify the government’s actions. Andrew Jackson in Indian Removal: Extract from Andrew Jackson's Seventh Annual Message to Congress implied that, “to these districts the Indians are removed at the expense of the United States, and with certain supplies of clothing, arms, ammunition, and other indispensable articles; they are also furnished gratuitously with provisions for the period of a year after their arrival at their new homes.”[47] This time, however, instead of suggesting that the natives would prosper and become civilized in their new western lands, he indicated that they could not become civilized if they were living among American society.[48]
            Through the use of dirty tactics a small percent of Cherokee chiefs met with the United States government to sign a treaty, which ceded over the remaining lands in Georgia. Feller stated that, “exploiting divisions within the tribe, Jackson signed the removal treaty with a minority faction.”[49] The Treaty of New Echota was illegitimately signed on December 29, 1835. In March 1836, the treaty was ratified by the Senate giving the treaty authenticity.
            The Treaty of New Echota was a false treaty, because it lacked the full participation of the Cherokee Nation. The Treaty of New Echota, however, stated that, “whereas a delegation of the Cherokee nation… with full power and authority to conclude a treaty with the United States…stipulate and agree with the Government of the United States to submit to the Senate to fix the amount which should be allowed the Cherokees for their claims and for a cession of their lands east of the Mississippi river.”[50] A large majority of the Cherokee people, led by John Ross, protested the treaty.[51] They argued that the treaty was invalid, because it did not represent the entirety of the Cherokee Nation.
            John Ross expressed his outrage over the treaty in a letter to Congress written on September 28, 1836. John Ross in Cherokee letter protesting the Treaty of New Echota explained that, “a spurious Delegation, in violation of a special injunction of the general council of the nation, proceeded…with this pretended treaty, and by false and fraudulent representations supplanted in the favor of the Government the legal and accredited Delegation of the Cherokee people…after making important alterations in its provisions, the recognition of the United States Government.”[52] Ross continued to argue that the treaty was not sanctioned by their tribal government.[53] In addition, he claimed that the signers of the treaty did not have proper authority to make such a deal with the United States.[54]
            Andrew Jackson did not see the completion of the Indian removal during his presidency. Instead, it came to a close after his vice-president, Martin Van Buren, was elected president in 1836. One of Jackson’s final orders was given to his Secretary of War, Lewis Cass, to remove the remaining Creeks from their lands. It was that winter that the Creeks endured the long march to Oklahoma.[55] The Cherokee continued to remain in opposition of their removal.
            On May 10, 1838, after receiving orders Major General Winfield Scott pleaded with the Cherokee to leave Georgia. Winfield Scott emphasized, “Cherokees! The President of the United States has sent me with a powerful army, to cause you, in obedience to the treaty of 1835 [of New Echota], to join that part of your people who have already established in prosperity on the other side of the Mississippi.”[56] Major General Scott continued to state that every Cherokee must move to the west and that his troops were there to make sure that there was no opposition to their removal.[57] Scott also indicated that he was unhappy with his orders and wanted compliance from the natives to avoid any tragedies.[58]
            A week later, Major General Scott sent commands to the divisions of Georgia militia under his command. Major General Scott reported that the Cherokee were the most civilized natives, but that the majority of them were opposed to the removal.[59] In Head Quarters, Eastern Division. Cherokee Agency, Ten. May 17, 1838 the orders were given informing them that, “the troops will probably be obliged to cover the whole country they [the Cherokee] inhabit, in order to make prisoners and to march to transport to Ross’ Landing or Gunter’s Landing, where they are to be finally delivered over to the Superintendent of Cherokee Emigration.”[60] Scott seemed to expect the possibility of hostilities when the roundup of natives commenced during the following summer.
            The roundup of natives began, during the summer of 1838, when the troops moved in and forced the Cherokee and remaining Creeks at gun point. Calloway reported that, “citing the Treaty of New Echota, federal troops moved in and forced out the Cherokees.”[61] The captured natives were held in stockades until the journey of 1,000 miles or more began that fall. A couple thousand Cherokee decided to peacefully and willingly make the journey westward to Oklahoma, while the large majority continued their resistance. In addition, approximately 1,000 Cherokee escaped and remained hidden among the mountains of North Carolina.[62]
            During the fall of 1838, approximately 15,000 to 16,000 Cherokee were forced to march westward under harsh conditions. According to Cherokee Die on the Trail of Tears, “the Trail of Tears is the name of the Cherokee’s forced removal by the U.S. to Indian Territory.”[63] It is estimated that between 4,000 and 6,000 Cherokee men, women, and children died along the trail.[64] The conditions worsened during with the presence of winter weather.
            By January 1839 the majority of Cherokee were trapped between the Ohio River and Mississippi River. The Mississippi River froze and prevented transportation by boat to the other side of the river’s crossing. About one fifth of the Cherokee population, who were scantly clothed and ill prepared for the journey, died of exposure, illness, or starvation. Several recorded accounts provide details about the severe conditions of the journey west.
            Accounts of the journey westward indicated how grave of the situation the Cherokee people faced along the Trail of Tears. Mary Cobb Agnew reported that her grandparents were waiting to cross the Mississippi River when dysentery ran through the camp causing many deaths.[65] Rachel Dodge explained that her grandmother witnessed the conditions of exposure and lack of food.[66] Josephine Pennington described the conditions she witnessed during the journey as the natives were herded onward like animals, and the sick and dying were either left to die along the trail or in carts.[67] In March 1839, the remaining survivors arrived in Oklahoma. 
            Witnesses to the conditions either found the Cherokee faced with horrific conditions or contributed to their misery. Frenchman, Alexis de Tocqueville observed the conditions and removal. According to First Peoples, “de Tocqueville…observed the removal process and concluded that, whereas the Spaniards had earned a reputation for brutality in their dispossession of the Indians, the Americans had attained the same objective under the pretense of legality and philanthropy.”[68] Thousand of Cherokee died as a result of the Indian Removal Act.
            Many people consider the journey of the Trail of Tears an American genocide. Feller commented that, “Jackson’s drive to remove the Indians quickly and cheaply provided a cover for brutality and chicanery.”[69] Opponents of Jackson’s removal policy saw it as a barbaric policy.[70] Still, others deny that the journey of the Cherokee along the Trail of Tears was genocide and was justified.
            Jackson’s removal policy and the pressure of the state and federal government on natives to cede their lands were unjustified acts, despite their attempts to claim that they were for the good of the natives. Feller claimed that, “the removal bill of 1830 inaugurated a searching debate that continued unabated to the end of Jackson’s presidency and beyond.”[71] The Indian Removal Act as an answer to the Indian Problem is still an issue argued on the grounds of morality and humanity. The Trail of Tears may not be genocide on the scale of what the Jews faced during the Holocaust, but it was genocide nonetheless.
            The American government saw the natives as a problem for their country’s expansion and prosperity. The federal and state governments sought to pressure the natives into moving westward during the 1820s through 1830s in order to acquire their lands. President Jackson and his administration set into motion a policy for removal that brought about the deaths of thousands of Cherokee. As a direct result of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, America witnessed genocide.

---

[1] “Treaty of Holston, 1791,” Cherokee Nation, accessed September 17, 2015, http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/Facts/TreatyofHolston,1791.aspx

[2] Colin G. Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History (Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 229-230.

[3] Ibid., 229.

[4] Daniel Feller, The Jacksonian Promise: America, 1815-1840 (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), 179.

[5] Ibid., 180.

[6] “Children,” Andrew Jackson’s Hermitage, accessed September 17, 2015, http://thehermitage.com/learn/andrew-jackson/family/children/

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] “The War of 1812 and Indian Wars,” Tennessee State Library and Achieves, accessed September 17, 2015, http://www.tennessee.gov/tsla/exhibits/veterans/1812.htm

[10] Ibid.

[11] Charles Sellers, The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815-1846 (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991), 98.

[12] Ibid., 98.

[13] Calloway, First Peoples, 231.

[14] Ibid., 231-232.

[15] Ibid., 231-232.

[16] Ibid., 232-233.

[17] Ibid., 231.

[18] Ibid., 231.

[19] Sellers, The Market Revolution, 309.

[20] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 179.

[21] Sellers, The Market Revolution, 310.

[22] Ibid., 310.

[23] Calloway, First Peoples, 230-230.

[24] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 180.

[25] Ibid., 181.

[26] Sellers, The Market Revolution, 311.

[27] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 180.

[28] Ibid., 180.

[29] Sellers, The Market Revolution, 311.

[30] “The Indian Removal Act of 1830,” Civics Online, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.civics-online.org/library/formatted/texts/indian_act.html

[31] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 182.

[32] Ibid., 180.

[33] Andrew Jackson, “President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress ‘On Indian Removal’ (1830),” Our Documents, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=25

[34] Ibid.

[35] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 180.

[36] Calloway, First Peoples, 233.

[37] “Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia,” Cherokee Nation, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/CherokeeNationvStateofGeorgia.aspx

[38] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 180.

[39] “Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia,” Cherokee Nation.

[40] Ibid.

[41] John Ridge, quoted in Colin G. Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History (Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 231.

[42] Ibid., 231.

[43] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 180-181.

[44] John Marshall, “Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia (1831) And Worcester v. Georgia (1832),” First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History (Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 273-274.

[45] Ibid., 274.

[46] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 181.

[47] Andrew Jackson, “Indian Removal: Extract from Andrew Jackson's Seventh Annual Message to Congress,” Archives of the West, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/two/removal.htm

[48] Ibid.

[49] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 181.

[50] “Treaty of New Echota,” Cherokee Nation, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/TreatyofNewEchota.aspx

[51] Calloway, First Peoples, 236.

[52] John Ross, “Cherokee Letter Protesting the Treaty of New Echota,” PBS, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3083t.html

[53] Ibid.

[54] Ibid.

[55] Calloway, First Peoples, 235.

[56] Winfield Scott, “Major General Scott’s Ultimatum,” Cherokee Nation, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/MajorGeneralScottsUltimatum.aspx

[57] Ibid.

[58] Ibid.

[59] “Orders. No. 25. Headquarters, Eastern Division. Cherokee Agency, Ten. May 17, 1838,” The Library of Congress, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.americaslibrary.gov/aa/jackson/aa_jackson_indians_4_e.html

[60] Ibid.

[61] Calloway, First Peoples, 236.

[62] “1838: Cherokee Die on Trail of Tears,” Native Voices, accessed August 28, 2015, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nativevoices/timeline/296.html

[63] Ibid.

[64] Ibid.

[65] Mary Cobb Agnew, quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears,” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center, accessed September 17, 2015, http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

[66] Rachel Dodge, quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears,” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center, accessed September 17, 2015, http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

[67] Josephine Pennington, quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears,” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center, accessed September 17, 2015, http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

[68] Alexis de Tocqueville, quoted in Colin G. Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History (Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008), 236.

[69] Feller, The Jacksonian Promise, 182.

[70] Ibid., 182.

[71] Ibid., 181.

Bibliography

“1838: Cherokee Die on Trail of Tears.” Native Voices. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nativevoices/timeline/296.html

 Agnew, Mary Cobb. Quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears.” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center. Accessed September 17, 2015. http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

 Calloway, Colin G. First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008.

 “Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia.” Cherokee Nation. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/CherokeeNationvStateofGeorgia.aspx

Dodge, Rachel. Quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears.” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center. Accessed September 17, 2015. http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

De Tocqueville, Alexis. Quoted in Colin G. Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008.

 Feller, Daniel. The Jacksonian Promise: America, 1815-1840. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.

 “The Indian Removal Act of 1830.” Civics Online. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.civics-online.org/library/formatted/texts/indian_act.html

Jackson, Andrew. “Indian Removal: Extract from Andrew Jackson's Seventh Annual Message to Congress.” Archives of the West. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/resources/archives/two/removal.htm

 Jackson, Andrew. “President Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress ‘On Indian Removal’ (1830).” Our Documents. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=25

 “Orders. No. 25. Headquarters, Eastern Division. Cherokee Agency, Ten. May 17, 1838.” The Library of Congress. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.americaslibrary.gov/aa/jackson/aa_jackson_indians_4_e.html

 Pennington, Josephine. Quoted in “Family Stories from the Trail of Tears.” American Native Press Archives and Sequoyah Research Center. Accessed September 17, 2015. http://www.ualr.edu/sequoyah/uploads/2011/11/Family%20Stories%20from%20the%20Trail%20of%20Tears.htm#TheTrailOfTears2

 Ridge, John. Quoted in Colin G. Calloway, First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008.

 Ross, John. “Cherokee Letter Protesting the Treaty of New Echota.” PBS. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3083t.html

 Sellers, Charles. The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815-1846. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991

Scott, Winfield. “Major General Scott’s Ultimatum.” Cherokee Nation.
            Accessed August 28, 2015. 
            ttp://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/MajorGeneralScottsUltimatum.aspx

 “Treaty of Holston, 1791.” Cherokee Nation.  Accessed September 17, 2015. http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/Facts/TreatyofHolston,1791.aspx

 “Treaty of New Echota.” Cherokee Nation. Accessed August 28, 2015. http://www.cherokee.org/AboutTheNation/History/TrailofTears/TreatyofNewEchota.aspx

 “The War of 1812 and Indian Wars.” Tennessee State Library and Achieves. Accessed September 17, 2015. http://www.tennessee.gov/tsla/exhibits/veterans/1812.htm