Andrew Jackson and Indian Removal free essay sample

It cannot be taken from them unless by their free consent, or by the right of conquest in case of a just war, (Document B). Because of this, the US allowed the Natives on American land their independent nations as hey were the prior occupants, and their land shouldve never be taken unless they agreed to it or they were to lose it in a war. Although the United States policy sounded fair, for many years, the Natives were intentionally tricked into treaties that ceded huge amount of territory to the whites.TO pay for the stealing of the Native Americans land, US government brought up ideas like that it is their duty to make new efforts for the preservation, improvement, and civilization of the native inhabitants as in the First Annual Message to Congress of President James Monroe (Document l). As time eased, the Native American nations near the States showed progress. We will write a custom essay sample on Andrew Jackson and Indian Removal or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In the letter of John C. Calhoun written to Henry Clay in 1820, he said that the Native tribes appear to be making gradual advances in industry and civilization.. . ND among them; the Cherokees exhibit a more favorable appearance than any other tribes of Indians (Document J). By 1825, the Cherokee Nation created schools and an agricultural basis of civilization, instead of hunting to survive. The Cherokee even invented the Cherokee alphabet (Document K). These were all signs of progress of assimilation. The Cherokee Indians and there southern tribes became more civilized and assimilated into the culture, it was more difficult for the US to take land from them, because they have learned to place a higher value upon the lands than more rude and savage tribes, as John C.Calhoun wrote to President James (Document M). Before Andrew Jackson, the IIS was trustworthy with the Native tribes. Andrew Jackson violently achieved his political goals of expanding into the west with violence. In his First Annual Message to Congress on 1829, Andrew Jackson agreed that It has long been the policy of Government to introduce among hem (Natives) the arts of civilization (Document O). But, he left hints of forced removal of Natives by saying that the United States lost no opportunity to purchase their lands and thrust them farther into the wilderness (Document O).In the full message exposed his ideas of expansion by advising the Natives to emigrate beyond the Mississippi or submit to the laws of those States, (Document O). It was not unexpected to see Andrew Jacksons purpose with the Natives. When he was still a General in 181 7, he commented about the Indians in the letters he wrote to the government officials. In his letters, he said that the Natives are the subjects of the United States and he expected that every Native American would naturally agree the removal. Document H) Finally he accomplished his goal of the removal because the Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress in 1830. The journey of Native tribes is now known as the Trail of Tears, because many Indians died from the weather and starvation on the road to the Indian Territory, today Oklahoma. Andrew Jacksons decision to remove Natives was unconstitutional. During Washingtons presidency, the Natives rights as strict nations were recognized.In 1832, Chief Justice John Marshall stated that Natives exclusive rights as a sovereign nation is not only acknowledged, but guaranteed by the United States when Georgia attempted to capture Cherokee lands in 1 832 (Document P). Andrew Jackson ignored the decision of the Supreme Court even used force to remove the tribes. This action was considered unconstitutional because he did not acknowledge the Supreme Courts authority to define the Constitution. To reach his own political goals and to fulfill his own interests in Western land, Andrew Jackson abandoned he policies of managing Native Americans that some past presidents left him.His decision to remove Natives without their consent was also unconstitutional, as many sources have shown that the Supreme Courts decision deemed it unconstitutional. Andrew Jacksons decision benefited the Americans in some way because more land was now available, but it is not hard for one to confirm that his policy in the sasss was not more a reformulation of the national policy than a change in that policy because it redirected the policy that was already in place.

Whiskey Rebellion and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions Essay Example

Whiskey Rebellion and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions Essay Example Whiskey Rebellion and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions Paper Whiskey Rebellion and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions Paper Although the power of the national government increased during the early republic, this development often faced serious opposition. Compare the motives and effectiveness of those opposed to the growing power of the national government during TWO of the following: The Whiskey Rebellion, the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, or the Hartford Convention. The Federalist dominated government displayed power like that of Great Britain. Once the people of the United States noticed this power through various sectionalized rebellions, letters in the newsprints, and resolutions written by several of our founding fathers, the people came to a mutual conclusion that a Federalist dominated congress was one that they need to oppose. The Whiskey Rebellion was an uprising in 1794 by 3,000 settlers in the backcountry of Pennsylvania who opposed the tax on distilled whiskey. Alexander Hamilton can be credited for the passing of this tax in 1791. The purpose of the tax was to help decrease the national debt; however, the western settlers thought the tax was discriminatory, and they objected it. For many of them, whiskey was the only medium of exchange. Once the rebellion had commenced, George Washington called to the militia to suppress the rebellion. Fifteen thousand troops were sent to Pennsylvania. Alexander Hamilton was at the head of the troops. The uprising ended almost immediately, and without bloodshed. This incident turned the frontier people into Jeffersonian followers or Anti-Federalists, but showed the strength of the Federal government. Throughout 1798, Jefferson conferred with James Madison about a strategy to oppose the Alien and Sedition Acts. Knowing that all branches of the national government were in Federalist hands, they turned to the states. Jefferson, secretly, wrote up a set of resolutions to be introduced into the next session of the Anti-Federalist Kentucky legislature, and Madison did the same for the Virginia legislature. One reason they kept their roles in the drafting secret was fear of being indicted under the sedition law, especially since Jefferson was the vice president. In suggesting the means for restoring rights abused by the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions questioned the very nature of the federal union. The documents affirmed that the federal government was created by the states and that the states must be superior. On that note, the resolutions declared that a state should be able to nullify a federal law. Kentucky and Virginia eventually adopted Jeffersons resolutions, denouncing the Sedition Act and other recent unconstitutional acts and asserting that the government was a compact of states, not of individuals; however, when the resolutions were submitted to the other states for approval there was no real result. The Whiskey Rebellion was the first significant opposition to the Federalist government; demonstrating the lack of power to the minority and the majority (the people of the backcountry), but the rebellion unfortunately failed after being confronted with the force of the government. The importance of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions lie in the fact that they were later considered to be the first notable statements of the states rights of government, a resolution that opened the way for the nullification controversy. Another note to be kept in mind is that the Alien and Sedition Act were written by the Federalist Party in order to maintain power in congress. The Whiskey Rebellion and The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were two contributing forces to the ultimate opposition of the Federalist dominated government.

American Government Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

American Government - Essay Example This is because the minority party can have powers to control the interests of the majority party in doing as they wish and desire. In addition, another reason for filibuster in the senate is to keep the senate from becoming a House, which may be succumbed to the passions of the day. In my view, I think filibuster should not be eliminated since it is a remarkably crucial and unique issue in the U.S. government. The filibuster should not be eliminated since it is a strong tool to the minority party. The minority can use the filibuster in making a point or trying to get their way. In the senate, a senator or his minority party can block a full nomination or senate consideration of a certain bill through unlimited debate of a proposal. The use of the filibuster by the minority ensures representation of the minority party in the senate, which creates a balance in the senate. Hence, the filibuster in the senate should not be eliminated since its withdrawal in the senate would threaten fre e speech and debate in the senate. List and explain some of the various roles (constitutional and extraconstitutional) that a president must play. Of these roles, which role do you believe is most important for a president, and why? The American president has both constitutional and extra constitutional roles with which he is associated. One of the constitutional roles of the American president is assuming the role of chief of state. Through this role, the president acts as a symbolic leader of America and abroad. When assuming this role, the president should be above politics. Another constitutional role assumed by the president is that of the chief administrator. In playing this role, the president is responsible for executing all rules and overseeing the bureaucracy. Another constitutional role is being the chief commander. In assuming this role, the president does not play a symbolic role; he decides what to do in times of conflict. The president is given a superior ability in a ssessing and reacting to situations. In addition, the president plays a constitutional role in assuming the role of a chief diplomat. In this role, the president determines countries to negotiate foreign policies and the ones to recognize officially. On the other hand, the president plays the role of a party leader as one of the extra constitutional roles. Another extra constitutional role played by the president is that of an economy manager. In taking this responsibility, the president directs the economy. In addition, another extra constitutional role of the president is being the voice of the people. The president represents all the people for the entire nation since it is the only position, which the whole nation has to decide who will be the leader. Of these roles, I think being the chief commander is the most vital role. This stems from the fact that the president is capable of analyzing situations and coming up with strategies to protect the nation. Describe the process wher eby the Supreme Court sets its agenda, makes its decisions, and delivers them to the public. The process of Supreme Court’s agenda-setting commences when a party loses a case in a lower court, desires the Supreme Court to evaluate the verdict of the lower court, and files a petition for an appeal with the court or a writ of certiorari. After the petition for certiorari and entire accompanying briefs are recorded, the office of the Supreme