Andrew Jackson's Indian Policy: A Reassessment
Author(s): F. P. Prucha
Source: The Journal of American History, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Dec., 1969), pp. 527-539
Published by: Organization of American Historians
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1904204
Accessed: 05/11/2010 11:38
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oah.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Organization of American Historians is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of American History.
http://www.jstor.org
AndrewJackson'sIndianPolicy:
A Reassessment
F. P. PRUCHA
A
GREATmanypersons-notexcluding
somenotablehistorians-have
adopteda "deviltheory"
of American
Indianpolicy.And in theirdemonic
hierarchy
AndrewJackson
has first
place.He is depictedprimarily,
if not
exclusively,
as a western
frontiersman
and famousIndianfighter,
whowas
a zealousadvocateof dispossessing
theIndiansand at heartan "Indianhater."Whenhe becamePresident,
thestory
goes,he madeuseofhisnew
power,ruthlessly
and at thepointof a bayonet,
to forcetheIndiansfrom
theirancestral
homesin theEastintodesertlandswestof theMississippi,
whichwereconsidered
forever
uselessto thewhiteman.1
Thissimplistic
viewofJackson's
Indianpolicyis unacceptable.
It wasnot
Jackson's
aim to crushthe Indiansbecause,as an old Indianfighter,
he
hatedIndians.Althoughhis yearsin theWesthad brought
himintofrequentcontactwiththe Indians,he by no meansdevelopeda doctrinaire
anti-Indian
attitude.
Rather,
as a military
man,hisdominant
goal in thedecades beforehe becamePresident
was to preserve
the security
and wellbeingof theUnitedStatesand itsIndianandwhiteinhabitants.
His militaryexperience,
indeed,gavehiman overriding
concern
forthesafety
ofthe
nationfromforeignratherthaninternal
enemies,and to someextentthe
anti-Indian
sentiment
thathas beenchargedagainstJackson
in hisearlycareerwas insteadbasicallyanti-British.
Jackson,as his firstbiographer
pointedout,had "manyprivatereasonsfordisliking"GreatBritain."In
her,he couldtracetheefficient
cause,why,in earlylife,hlehad beenleft
The author is professorof historyin Marquette University.
'Typical examplesof thisview are Oscar Handlin,The Historyof the UnitedStates
(2 vols.,New York, 1967-1968),I, 445; T. HarryWilliams,RichardN. Current,
and
FrankFreidel,A Historyof the UnitedStates (2 vols.,New York, 1964), I, 392;
ThomasA. Bailey,The AmericanPageant:A Historyof the Republic(3rd. ed., New
York, 1966), 269; Dale Van Every,Disinherited:
The Lost Birthright
of theAmerican
Indian (New York, 1966), 103; R. S. Cotterill,"FederalIndianManagement
in the
South,1789-1825,"MississippiValleyHistoricalReview,XX (Dec. 1933), 347.
*527-
528
The Journal
of American
History
forlorn
andwretched,
without
a singlerelation
in theworld."2His frontier
experience,
too, had convincedhimthatforeignagentswerebehindthe
raisedtomahawks
of thered men.In 1808, aftera groupof settlers
had
beenkilledbytheCreeks,
Jackson
toldhismilitiatroops:" [T]his brings
to
our recollection
the horridbarbarity
committed
on our frontier
in 1777
undertheinfluence
of andbytheordersofGreatBritain,
anditis presumeable thatthesameinfluence
has excitedthosebarbarians
to thelateandrecentactsof butchery
andmurder.... Fromthatdateon thereis hardlya
statement
byJackson
aboutIndiandangersthatdoesnotaimsharpbarbsat
England.His reaction
to theBattleofTippecanoewasthattheIndianshad
been"excitedtowarbythesecrete
agentsofGreatBritain."4
Jackson's
warwiththeCreeksin 1813-1814,whichbrought
himhisfirst
nationalmilitary
fame,and his subsequent
demandsfora largecessionof
Creeklandswerepartof his concernforsecurity
in theWest.5In 1815,
and Chickasaws
whentheCherokees
claimsto
gave up theiroverlapping
landswithintheCreekcession,Jackson
wrotewithsomeexultation
to Secretary
of War JamesMonroe:"ThisTerritory
addedto thecreekcession,
opensan avenueto thedefenceof thelowercountry,
in a politicalpointof
viewincalculable."6
A fewmonths
laterhe added: "The soonertheselands
arebrought
intomarkett,
security
willbe givento
[thesooner]a permanant
as wellas themostvulnarable
what,I deem,themostimportant,
partofthe
ourfortifications
oncesettled,
union.This country
of defencein thelower
all [Eluropewillceasetolookatitwithan eyetoconcountry
compleated,
quest.Thereis no otherpointoftheunion(americaunited)thatcombined
[Eluropecanexpecttoinvadewithsuccess."7
Jackson's
plans withregardto the Indiansin Floridaweregoverned
He wanted"to concentrate
and locate
by similarprinciplesof security.
the FJ1oridalIndiansat such a pointas will promotetheirhappiness
2 JohnH. Eaton, The Life of AndrewJackson,Major General in theServiceof the United
of the Creek
States: Comprisinga Historyof the War in the South,fromthe Commencement
Campaign,to the Terminationof HostilitiesBeforeNew Orleans (Philadelphia, 1817), 18.
'John Spencer Bassett, ed., Correspondenceof Andrew Jackson (7 vols., Washington,
1926-1935), I, 188.
'Andrew Jackson to William Henry Harrison, Nov. 30, 1811, ibid., 210. See also
Jacksonto JamesWinchester,Nov. 28, 1811; Jacksonto Willie Blount, June 4, July 10,
and Dec. 21, 1812; Jacksonto Thomas Pinckney,May 18, 1814, ibid., I, 209, 226, 231-32,
250, II, 3-4.
'For the part played by desire for defenseand securityin the Treaty of Fort Jackson,
see Jacksonto Pinckney,May 18, 1814, ibid., II, 2-3, and Eaton, Life of Jackson,183-87.
Eaton's biographycan be taken as representingJackson'sviews.
'Jackson to James Monroe, Oct. 23, 1816, Bassett, Correspondence,II, 261.
'Jackson to Monroe, Jan. 6, 1817, ibid., 272. See also Jacksonto Monroe, March 4,
1817, ibid., 277-78.
IndianPolicy
Jackson's
Andrew
529
to thatTerritory
a densepopand at thesametime,afford
and prosperity
and
ulationbetweenthemand the ocean whichwill affordprotection
peace to all."8 On lateroccasionsthe same viewswere evident.When
JackIndiansforremoval,
wereunderwaywiththesouthern
negotiations
areofgreatimportance
country
and choctaw
sonwrote:"JT1he chickasaw
to us in thedefenceof the lowercountry[;}a whitepopulationinstead
our own defencemuch."And again:
of the Indian,would strengthen
and
to the prosperity
is of greatimportance
"This sectionof country
wouldadd
of thelowerMississippi{;}a densewhitepopulation
strength
if it can,
muchto itssafetyin a stateof war,and it oughtto be obtained,
terms."
on anythinglikereasonable
on justicetoward
insisted
In hisdirectdealingswiththeIndians,Jackson
outragesagainst
bothhostileand peacefulIndians.Thosewhocommitted
Inbuttherightsof friendly
punished,
thewhiteswereto be summarily
in Indian
reputation
dianswereto be protected.
Too muchof Jackson's
andhardForthright
of thesepositions.
matters
has beenbasedon thefirst
thatenIndians
hostile
toward
policy
a
no-nonsense
hitting,
he adopted
For example,whena whitewomanwas
dearedhimto thefrontiersmen.
takencaptivebytheCreeks,he declared:"Withsucharmsandsuppliesas I
thecreekTowns,untilltheCaptive,withher
can obtainI shallpenetrate
in layingwastetheir
Justifiable,
up,andthinkmyself
Captorsaredelivered
andleadingintoCaptheirhouses,killingtheirwarriors
villiages,burning
oftheCaptive,
untillI do obtaina surrender
theirwivesandchildren,
tivity
In his generalordersto theTennesseemilitiaafterhe
and theCaptors."10
venhe calledfor"retaliatory
receivednewsof the FortMimsmassacre,
barbarians."'He couldspeak
bloodthirsty
geance"againstthe"inhuman
campaignagainsttheCreeksand
of the"lextaliones,''12andhisaggressive
of
indications
hisescapadein Floridain theFirstSeminoleWar arefurther
hismood.
andhe was
withoneof justiceand fairness,
thisattitude
Buthe matched
in friendtherightsof theIndianswholivedpeaceably
firmin upholding
official
actsas majorgeneralofthe
One ofhisfirst
shipwiththeAmericans.
who
of a militiaofficer
Tennesseemilitiawas to insiston thepunishment
'Jackson to John C. Calhoun, Aug. 1823, ibid.,III, 202. See also Jackson'stalk with
Sept. 20, 1821, ibid., 118.
Indian chieftains,
'Jackson to John Coffee,Aug. 2.0, 1826; Jacksonto Coffee,Sept. 2, 1826, ibid., 310,
312. See also Fred L. Israel, ed., The State of the Union Messages of the Presidents,
1790-1966 (3 vols.,New York, 1966), I, 334.
"Jackson to Blount, July 3, 1812, Bassett, Correspondence,I, 230.
" GeneralOrders,Sept. 19, 1813, ibid., 319-20.
1 Jacksonto David Holmes, April 18, 1814, ibid., 505.
530
The Journal
of American
History
instigated
or at leastpermitted
themurder
of an Indian.'3On another
occasion,whena groupof Tennesseevolunteers
robbeda friendly
Cherokee,
Jackson's
wrathburstforth:"thata settofmenshouldwithout
anyauthorityroba manwhois claimedas a member
of theCherokee
nation,whois
now friendly
and engagedwithus in a war againstthehostilecreeks,is
suchan outrage,
totherulesofwar,thelawsofnationsandofcivilsociety,
and well calculatedto sowerthe mindsof the wholenationagainstthe
unitedStates,and is suchas oughtto meetwiththefrowns
of everygood
citizen,and theagentsbe promptly
prosecuted
and punishedas robers."It
was,he said,as muchtheftas thoughtheproperty
had beenstolenfroma
whitecitizen.He demandedan inquiry
in orderto determine
whether
any
commissioned
officers
had beenpresentor had had anyknowledge
of this
"atrocious
act,"and he wantedtheofficers
immediately
arrested,
triedby
court-martial,
andthenturned
overtothecivilauthority.14
Again,duringtheSeminoleWar,whenGeorgiatroopsattacked
a village
of friendly
Indians,Jacksonexcoriated
thegovernorfor"thebase,cowardlyand inhumanattack,on theold womanfwomen]and menof the
chehawvillage,whilsttheWarriorsof thatvillage was withme,fighting
thebattlesof our countryagainstthecommonenemy."It was strange,
he
said, "thattherecould existwithintheU. States,a cowardly
monster
in
humanshape,thatcouldviolatethesanctity
of a flag,whenbornebyany
person,butmoreparticularly
whenin thehandsof a superanuated
Indian
chiefworndownwithage. Suchbasecowardice
andmurderous
conductas
thistransaction
affords,
has notitsparalelin history
and shouldmeetwith
itsmerited
whowas
punishment."
Jackson
orderedthearrestof theofficer
responsible
and declared:"Thisactwillto thelastagesfixa stainuponthe
character
ofGeorgia.''15
actionas commander
of theDivisionof theSouthin removing
Jackson's
whitesquatters
fromIndianlandsis another
proofthathe was notoblivious to Indianrights.WhentheIndianAgentReturnJ.Meigsin 1820 reassistance
in removing
intruders
on Cherokeelands,Jackquestedmilitary
of twenty
to aid in the
son ordereda detachment
menundera lieutenant
detailedforthedutywas "young
removal.Afterlearningthattheofficer
he senthis own aide-de-camp,
and inexperienced,"
CaptainRichardK.
of thetroopsandexecutetheorderof removal.16
Call,to assumecommand
of War
"CaptainCall informs
me," he wrotein one reportto Secretary
13
Jackson
to ColonelMcKinney,
May10, 1802,ibid.,62.
toJohnCocke,Dec. 28, 1813,ibid.,415.
14Jackson
to Governor
of Georgia,May 7, 1818,ibid.,II, 369-70.
15Jackson
Jacksonto Calhoun,July9, 1820, ibid., III, 29. See also Jackson'snoticeto the
intruders,
ibid.,26n.
IndianPolicy
Jackson's
Andrew
531
andmen
wasthreatened,
JohnC. Calhoun,"thatmuchnoiseof opposition
on theapproachof theregulars,
collectedforthepurposewho seperated
theCherokees
in theValleyas soonas these
to destroy
butwho threaten
peoa letterto thoseinfatuated
Troopsaregone.Capt.Call has addressed
iftheyshouldatpunishment
of speedyand exemplary
ple,withassurance
Laterhe wrotethatCall had
intoexecution."
temptto carrytheirthreats
andmuchtothe
andprudence
hisduties"withbothjudgement,
performed
andthattheactionwould"havetheeffect
of theCherokee-Nation"
interest
7
of ourTreatieswiththatNation."'
theinfraction
of preventing
in future
"the
believed
that
he
that
declare
to
or
an Indian-hater
To call Jackson
thathadlittlemeanonlygoodIndianis a deadIndian"is to speakinterms
theIndiansto
It is true,ofcourse,thathe didnotconsider
ingtoJackson.18
view
uncomplimentary
be noblesavages.He had,forexample,a generally
to operateupon
and he arguedthatit was necessary
of theirmotivation,
thanon somehighermotive.Thus,in 1812 hewrote:"I
theirfears,rather
passion.
themostpredominant
and selfpreservation
believeself interest
just
later,
years
Twenty-five
an
indian."'19
with
love
than
better
is
[FJear
andhe wrote:"long
thesamethemerecurred;
afterhe leftthepresidency,
bytheirfears.
methattheyareonlyto be wellgoverned
satisfies
experience
By a
thecausesof theirdestruction.
If we feedtheiravaricewe accelerate
allevito
something
yet
do
may
we
power
military
our
of
exertion
prudent
takefromthemthe
at thesametimethatwe certainly
ate theircondition
to ourfrontier."20
meansofinjury
evilor inferior.
Yet Jacksondid notholdthatIndianswereinherently
Inindividual
likedandrespected
He eagerly
usedIndianallies,personally
dianchiefs,and,when (in theCreekcampaign)an orphanedIndianboy
was aboutto be killedbyIndiansuponwhomhis carewouldfall,generto be raised
ouslytookcareof thechildandsenthimhometoMrs.Jackson
thatthebarbaricstatein
was convinced
withhis son Andrew.2'Jackson
mostIndianshad to change,buthe was also conwhichhe encountered
if theInvincedthatthechangewas possibleand to an extentinevitable
diansweretosurvive.
opinionaboutthestatusof theIndianswas governed
Muchof Jackson's
"Jackson to Calhoun, July 26, Sept. 15, 1820, ibid., 30-31, 31n.
Note this recent statement:"President Jackson, himself a veteran Indian fighter,
wasted little sympathyon the paint-bedaubed'varmints.'He accepted fully the brutal
creed of his fellow Westernersthat 'the only good Indian is a dead Indian.'" Bailey,
1
Pageant,269.
American
Blount, June 17, 1812, Bassett,Correspondence,I, 227-28.
'Jackson to Joel R. Poinsett,Aug. 27, 1837, ibid.,V, 507.
' See Jacksonto Mrs. Jackson,Dec. 19, 1813, ibid., I, 400-01; Eaton, Life of Jackson,
19 Jacksonto
395-96.
532
The Journalof AmericanHistory
by his firmconviction
thattheydid notconstitute
sovereign
nations,
who
couldbe dealtwithin formaltreaties
as thoughtheywereforeign
powers.
ThattheUnitedStatesin factdid so,Jackson
argued,was a historical
fact
whichresultedfromthefeeblepositionof thenewAmerican
government
whenitfirst
facedtheIndiansduringandimmediately
aftertheRevolution.
To continue
to dealwiththeIndiansinthisfashion,
whenthepowerofthe
UnitedStatesno longermadeit necessary,
wastoJackson's
mindabsurd.It
was hightime,he saidin 1820,to do awaywiththe"farceoftreating
with
Indiantribes."22
Jackson
wantedCongressto legislatefortheIndiansas it
didforwhiteAmericans.
Fromthisviewof thelimitedpoliticalstatusof theIndianswithinthe
territorial
UnitedStates,
Jackson
derivedtwoimportant
corollaries.
One deniedthattheIndianshad absolutetitleto all thelandsthattheyclaimed.
The UnitedStates,in justice,shouldallow the Indiansamplelandsfor
theirsupport,
butJackson
did notbelievethattheywereentitled
to more.
He deniedanyrightofdomainandridiculed
theIndianclaimsto "tracts
of
on whichtheyhaveneither
country
dweltnormadeimprovements,
merely
becausetheyhave seen themfromthe mountainor passedthemin the
chase."23
A secondcorollary
of equal importwas Jackson's
opinionthattheIndians could not establishindependent
fullpolitical
enclaves(exercising
states.
sovereignty)
withintheUnitedStatesorwithinanyoftheindividual
If theirproperstatuswas as subjects
of theUnitedStates,thentheyshould
be obligedto submit
had reachedthisconclusion
to American
laws.Jackson
annualmesearlyin hiscareer,
buthisclassicstatement
appearedinhisfirst
andthe
to
at
a
time
when
the
conflict
between
the
Cherokees
sage Congress,
"If theGeneralGovernStateof Georgiahad reachedcrisisproportions.
Statewithin
mentis notpermitted
theerection
of a confederate
to tolerate
he
theterritory
of thisUnionagainstherconsent,"
of one of themembers
to
said, "muchless couldit allowa foreignand independent
government
establishitselfthere."He announcedthathe had told the Indiansthat
wouldnotbe counto establish
an independent
"theirattempt
government
of theUnitedStates,and advisedthemto emitenancedbytheExecutive
orsubmit
tothelawsofthoseStates."24
"I have
gratebeyondtheMississippi
22 Jackson to Calhoun, Sept. 2, 1820, Bassett,Correspondence,
III, 31-32. See also
Jackson to John Quincy Adams, Oct. 6, 1821; Jackson to Calhoun, Sept. 17, 1821,
Walter Lowrie and Walter S. Franklin,eds., AmericanStatePapers: Miscellaneoms(2 vols.,
Washington,1834), II, 909, 911-12.
23 Israel, Stateof the UnionMessages,I, 310. See also Jacksonto Isaac Shelby,Aug.
II, 388.
11, 1818, Bassett,Correspondence,
24 Israel, State of the Union Messages, I, 308-09. Jackson dealt at length with this
questionin his messageto theSenate,Feb. 22, 1831. JamesD. Richardson,ed., A Compilation
AndrewJackson'sIndian Policy
533
been unable to perceiveany sufficient
reason,"Jacksonaffirmed,
"why the
Red man more than the white,may claim exemptionfromthe municipal
laws of the statewithinwhichtheyreside; and governedby thatbelief,I
have so declaredand so acted."25
Jackson'sown draftof thisfirstannual messagepresentsa morepersonal
view thanthefinalpublicversionand givessome insightintohis reasoning.
He wrote:
The policyof thegovernment
has beengraduallyto open to themthewaysof
civilisation;
and fromtheirwandering
habits,to enticethemto a courseof life
calculatedto presentfairerprospectsof comfort
and happiness.To effect
this
a system
to
shouldbe devisedfortheirbenefit,
kindand liberal,and gradually
be enlargedas theymayevincea capability
to enjoyit. It will not answerto
encourage
themto theidea of exclusiveselfgovernment.
It is impracticable.
No
people were ever free,or capable of formingand carrying
into executiona
social compactforthemselves
untileducationand intelligence
was firstintroduced.There are withthosetribes,a few educatedand well informed
men,
possessingmind and Judgment,
and capable of conducting
public affairsto
advantage;butobservation
provesthatthegreatbodyof thesouthern
tribesof
Indians,are erraticin theirhabits,and wantingin thoseendowments,
which
are suitedto a peoplewho woulddirectthemselves,
and underit be happyand
prosperous.26
Jacksonwas convincedfromhis observationof the political incompetenceof the general run of Indians thatthe treatysystemplayed into the
hands of the chiefsand theirwhite and half-breedadvisersto the detrimentof the commonIndians. He said on one occasionthat such leaders
"are like some of our bawlingpoliticians,who loudly exclaimwe are the
friendsof the people, but who, when theryj obtain theirviews care no
more for the happinessor wellfareof the people than the Devil doesbut each procure[sJ influencethroughthe same channell and for the
same base purpose,self-agrandisement."27
Jacksonwas genuinelyconcernedfor the well-beingof the Indians and
fortheircivilization.Althoughhis criticswould scoffat the idea of placing
his assertions-bothpublic and prihim on the roll of the humanitarians,
vate-add up to a consistentbeliefthatthe Indianswere capable of accepting white civilization,the hope thattheywould eventuallydo so, and reof theMessages and Papers of the Presidents(11 vols.,Washington,1897-1914), II, 536-41.
See also Jackson to Secretaryof War [1831 ?], Bassett, Correspondence,IV, 219-20.
' Draft of Second Annual Message, Series 8, vol. 174, nos. 1409-1410,AndrewJackson
Papers (Manuscript Division, Libraryof Congress). This statementdoes not appear in
the finalversion.
' Draft of First Annual Message, Dec. 8, 1829, Bassett, Correspondence,IV, 103-04.
27 Jacksonto Robert Butler, June 21, 1817, ibid., II, 299. See also Jacksonto Coffee,
June 21, 1817; U. S. Commissionersto SecretaryGraham,July8, 1817, ibid., 198, 300.
534
The Journalof AmericanHistory
to takemeasuresthatwouldmakethechangepossibleand
peatedefforts
evenspeeditalong.
troops
to hisvictorious
delivered
His visionappearsin theproclamation
River.
the
Tallapoosa
on
Bend
in April1814,aftertheBattleof Horseshoe
ourWomenandChilof theTallapoosawillno longermurder
"The fiends
he declared."Theirmidnight
dren,or disturbthe quietof our borders,"
theirCouncilhouse,orshineuponthevicwillno moreillumine
flambeaux
fromthefaceof the
orgies.Theyhavedisappeared
timof theirinfernal
will arisewhowillknowtheirduEarth.In theirplacesa newgeneration
of
fortheutensils
will be exchanged
The weaponsof warefare
tiesbetter.
to
and
seems
sterility
in
withers
whichnow
and thewilderness
husbandry;
it,willblossomas therose,andbewhichoverspreads
mournthedisolation
ofthearts."28
comethenursery
butwholepresidency
The removalpolicy,begunlongbeforeJackson's
of theseviews.Jackson
adoptedby him,was the culmination
heartedly
as
theprocessof civilization,
lookeduponremovalas a meansofprotecting
invasion,
fromforeign
security
landforwhitesettlers,
wellas of providing
and a quietingof theclamorsof Georgiaagainstthefederalgovernment.
as politerato be dismissed
thought
in Jackson's
Thisviewis toopervasive
His outlookwas essenwhiteaggrandizement.
foravaricious
tionalization
society
thetransition
froma hunting
envisaged
Jackson
tiallyJeffersonian.
a processthatwouldmakeit possiblefor
society,
to a settledagricultural
theIndiansto existwitha higherscaleof livingon lessland,and which
wouldmakeit possibleforthosewhoadoptedwhitewaysto be quietlyabtheiridentity
Thosewhowishedto preserve
sorbedintothewhitesociety.
and
fromtheeconomic
in Indiannationscoulddo it onlybywithdrawing
whitesetexertedupontheirenclavesbythedominant
politicalpressures
theymightmoveat theirownpace toward
tlers.Westof theMississippi
civilization.29
policymustbe madein thelightof thefeasible
Evaluationof Jackson's
cannotbe
availableto menof his time.The removalprogram
alternatives
southern
and
western
President's
land
to
the
a
as
satisfy
grab
simply
judged
andvarfacedwascomplex,
thatJackson
The Indianproblem
constituents.
Therewere,in fact,fourpossibilities.
wereproposed.
ioussolutions
Theycouldhave
First,the Indianscould simplyhave beendestroyed.
orpushed
of
their
out
in
hounded
killed
settlements,
been
war,mercilessly
untiltheyweredestroyed
bydiseaseorstarwestoffthelandbybruteforce,
ifnot
to saythatthiswas implicitly,
vation.It is nottooharsha judgment
' Proclamation,April 2, 1814, ibid.,I, 494.
I, 310, 335, 354, 386-87.
9Israel,StateoftheUnionMessages,
Andrew
Jackson's
IndianPolicy
535
explicitly,
thepolicyofmanyoftheaggressive
frontiersmen.
Butitwasnot
thepolicy,implicit
or explicit,
of Jackson
and theresponsible
government
in his administration
officials
or of thosepreceding
or followinghis. It
wouldbe easytocompilean anthology
ofstatements
ofhorror
onthepartof
government
officials
towardanysuchapproach
tothesolution
oftheIndian
problem.
Second,theIndianscouldhavebeenrapidlyassimilated
intowhitesociety.It is nowclearthatthiswasnota feasiblesolution.
Indianculture
hasa
viability
thatcontinually
impresses
anthropologists,
and to becomewhite
menwas notthegoal of theIndians.Butmanyimportant
andlearnedmen
of thedaythought
thatthiswas a possibility.
Somewereso sanguineas to
hope thatwithinone generation
the Indianscould be taughtthewhite
man'swaysand that,oncetheylearnedthem,theywouldautomatically
desireto turnto thatsortof life.ThomasJefferson
nevertiredof tellingthe
Indiansof theadvantages
of farming
overhunting,
and thechiefpurpose
of schoolswas to traintheIndianchildren
in whiteways,thereby
making
themimmediately
absorbable
intothedominant
culture.
This solutionwas
at firstthehope of humanitarians
who had theinterest
of theIndiansat
heart,butlittlebylittlemanycameto agreewithJackson
thatthisdream
wasnotgoingtobe fulfilled.
Third,if theIndianswerenotto be destroyed
and if theycouldnotbe
immediately
assimilated,
theymightbe protected
in theirown cultureon
theirancestral
landsin theEast-or, at least,on reasonably
largeremnants
of thoselands.Theywouldthenbe enclaveswithinthewhitesociety
and
wouldbe protected
bytheirtreaty
agreements
and bymilitary
force.This
was thealternative
demanded
bytheopponents
ofJackson's
removalbillforexample,themissionaries
of theAmerican
Boardof Commissioners
for
ForeignMissions.Butthis,too,was infeasible,
giventhepoliticalandmiliof theUnitedStatesat thetime.The federalgovernment
taryconditions
couldnothaveprovideda standing
toprotect
the
armyofsufficient
strength
enclavesof Indianterritory
fromtheencroachments
of thewhites.Jackson
couldnotwithstand
Georgia'sdemandsfortheendoftheimperium
in ihnCherokee
the
and
its
Nation
newconstitution,
by
notbeperiorepresented
causeof someinherent
on hispartbutbecausethepoliticalsituimmorality
wouldnotpermit
ationofAmerica
it.
The jurisdictional
disputecannotbe easilydismissed.
WeretheIndian
nations?
The questionreceiveditslegalanswerin John
tribesindependent
Marshall'sdecisionin Cherokee
Nationv. Georgia,in whichthechiefjusdomestic
nations."But aside
ticedefinedtheIndiantribesas "dependent
fromthe juridicaldecision,werethe Indians,in fact,independent,
and
536
The Journalof AmericanHistory
thesupport-politiwithout
theirindependence
couldtheyhavemaintained
is no,as
clearly,
The answer,
cal andmilitary-ofthefederalgovernment?
couldhavestood
at thetimepointedout.The federalgovernment
writers
firmin defenseof theIndiannationsagainstGeorgia,butthiswouldhave
thatitssoverit intohead-oncollisionwitha state,whichinsisted
brought
uponbytheCherokees.
wasbeingimpinged
eignty
wanted.
thatanyonein thefederalgovernment
This was nota conflict
Monroehad beenslowto give in to thedemandsof theGeorPresident
gians.He had refusedto be panickedintohastyactionbeforehe had conthata stubhe becameconvinced
Buteventually
sideredall thepossibilities.
and fromthat
stateswouldsolvenothing,
to thesouthern
bornresistance
soughtto
JohnQuincyAdamsandJackson,
pointon he and hissuccessors,
thecause.TheywantedtheIndiansto be
solvetheproblembyremoving
placedin someareawheretheproblemof federalversusstatejurisdiction
landin feesimpleby
wouldnotarise,wheretheIndianscouldbe granted
and not have to worryaboutwhatsome state
the federalgovernment
andprerogatives.80
wereitsrights
thought
then,was removal.To Jacksonthis
The fourthand finalpossibility,
norquickassimiadequateprotection
neither
seemedtheonlyanswer.Since
to
lationof the Indianswas possible,it seemedreasonableand necessary
byfedermovetheIndiansto someareawheretheywouldnotbe disturbed
where
of whitesettlers,
disputesor byencroachments
al-statejurisdictional
if
at theirownpace,or, they
theycoulddevelopon theroadto civilization
theirownculture.
so desired,
preserve
deproposedwhathe repeatedly
To ease the removalprocessJackson
scribedas-and believedto be-liberal terms.He againand againurged
who made treatiesto pay the Indianswell fortheir
the commissioners
would
thatthegovernment
lands,to makesurethattheIndiansunderstood
in theirnewhomes,
paythecostsof removalandhelpthemgetestablished
fortheIndiansto examinethelandsin theWestandto
to makeprovision
Whenhe readthetreaty
agreeto acceptthembeforetheywereallotted.81
in 1832,he wrotetohisold friendGeneral
withtheChickasaws
negotiated
"I thinkit is a goodone,andsurely
oneofthecommissioners:
JohnCoffee,
who
have
or those
beenweepingovertheoppresthereligiousenthusiasts,
or jussionof theIndianswill notfindfaultwithit forwantof liberality
"'For the developmentof the removal idea see Annie Heloise Abel, "The History of
Events Resultingin Indian ConsolidationWest of the Mississippi," Annual Report of the
American Historical Association for the Year 1906 (2 vols., Washington, 1908), I,
233-450; Francis Paul Prucha, American Indian Policy in the Formative Years: The
Indian Trade and IntercourseActs, 1790-1834 (Cambridge, 1962), 224-49.
a See, for example, Jackson to Coffee
[Sept. 1826?], Bassett, Correspondence,III,
315-16.
AndrewJackson'sIndian Policy
537
tice to the Indians."32Typicalof his views was his letterto CaptainJames
Gadsden in 1829:
You mayrestassuredthatI shalladhereto thejustand humanepolicytowards
theIndianswhichI havecommenced.
In thisspiritI haverecommended
themto
quittheirpossessions
on thisside of theMississippi,
and go to a country
to the
westwherethereis everyprobability
thattheywill alwaysbe freefromthe
mercenary
influence
of Whitemen,and undisturbed
by the local authority
of
the states:Under such circumstances
the GeneralGovernment
can exercisea
parentalcontrolovertheirinterests
and possiblyperpetuate
theirrace.33
The idea of parentalor paternalcare was pervasive.Jacksontold Congress in a special message in February1832: "Being more and more convinced that the destinyof the Indians withinthe settledportionof the
United Statesdependsupon theirentireand speedymigrationto the countrywest of the Mississippi set apart for theirpermanentresidence,I am
anxiousthatall the arrangements
necessaryto thecompleteexecutionof the
plan of removaland to the ultimatesecurityand improvement
of the Indians should be made withoutfurtherdelay." Once removalwas accomplished, "therewould then be no questionof jurisdictionto preventthe
Governmentfromexercisingsucha generalcontrolovertheiraffairsa'smay
be essentialto theirinterestand safety."34
Jackson,in fact,thoughtin termsof a confederacyof the southernIndians in the West, developing their own territorialgovernmentwhich
should be on a par withthe territories
of thewhitesand eventuallytake its
place in the Union.35 This aspectof the removalpolicy,becauseit was not
has been largelyforgotten.
fullyimplemented,
In the bills reportedin 1834 for the reorganizationof Indian affairs
therewas, in additionto a new tradeand intercourse
act and an act forthe
reorganizationof the Indian Office,a bill "for the establishment
of the
and forthe securityand protectionof the emigrantand
WesternTerritory,
other Indian tribestherein."This was quashed, not by westerninterests
who might be consideredhostile to the Indians, but by men like John
QuincyAdams, who did not like the technicaldetailsof the bill and who
in
fearedloss of easternpower and prestigeby the admissionof territories
theWest.88
Jacksoncontinuedto urge Congressto fulfillits obligationsto the Indians who had removed.In his eighthannualmessage,in December1836,
"2Jacksonto Coffee,Nov. 6, 1832, ibid., IV, 483.
"Jackson to JamesGadsden,Oct. 12, 1829, ibid., 81.
3 Richardson,
Messages and Papers of thePresidents,II, 565-66.
35Jackson to Coffee,Feb. 19, 1832; Jacksonto JohnD. Terrill,July29, 1826, Bassett,
Correspondence,
IV, 406, III, 308-09.
" Prucha, AmericanIndian Policy in the FormativeYears, 269-73.
538
The Journalof AmericanHistory
he called attention
"to the importance
of providinga well-digested
and
comprehensive
system
fortheprotection,
supervision,
and improvement
of
thevarioustribesnowplantedin theIndiancountry."
He strongly
backed
thesuggestions
of thecommissioner
of Indianaffairs
and thesecretary
of
warfordeveloping
a confederated
Indiangovernment
in theWestandfor
establishing
military
postsin theIndiancountry
to protect
thetribes."The
besthopesof humanity
in regardto theaboriginal
race,thewelfareofour
rapidlyextending
settlements,
andthehonoroftheUnitedStates,"he said,
.Iareall deeplyinvolvedin therelations
existing
betweenthisGovernment
andtheemigrating
tribes."37
Jackson's
Indianpolicyoccasioned
greatdebateandgreatopposition
durThis is notto be wonderedat. The "Indianprobing his administration.
lem" was a complicated
and emotion-filled
subject,and it calledforthtremendousefforts
on behalfof theIndiansbysomemissionary
groupsand
otherhumanitarians,
whospokeloudlyaboutIndianrights.
The issuealso
becamea party
one.
The hue and cryraisedagainstremovalin Jackson'sadministration
shouldnot be misinterpreted.
At the urgingof the AmericanBoard of
forForeignMissions,hundreds
Commissioners
of churchgroupsdeluged
Congresswithmemorials
condemning
theremovalpolicyas a violationof
Indianrights;
andJeremiah
Evarts,
thesecretary
oftheBoard,wrotea notable seriesof essaysunderthename"WilliamPenn,"whichasserted
that
the originaltreaties
mustbe maintained.38
It is notwithoutinterest
that
suchopposition
was centered
in areasthatwerepolitically
hostileto Jackson. Therewereequallysincereand humanitarian
voicesspeakingout in
supportof removal,and theyweresupported
bymensuchas ThomasL.
McKenney,head of theIndianOffice;WilliamClark,superintendent
of
Indianaffairs
at St. Louis;LewisCass,whohad servedon thefrontier
for
eighteen
yearsas governor
of MichiganTerritory;
andtheBaptistmissionaryIsaac McCoy-all menwithlong experience
in Indianrelationsand
fortheIndians.
deepsympathy
himself
Jackson
had no doubtthathispolicywas in thebestinterests
of
theIndians."Towardthisraceof peopleI entertain
thekindest
feelings,"
he toldthe Senatein 1831, "and am notsensiblethattheviewswhichI
" Israel, Stateof the Union Messages,1, 465-66.
' See the indexes to the House Journal,21 Cong., 1
Sess. (Serial 194), 897-98, and
the Senate Journal, 21 Cong., 1 Sess. (Serial 191), 534, for the presentationof the
memorials.Some of the memorialswere ordered printedand appear in the serial set of
congressionaldocuments.JeremiahEvarts'essayswere publishedin book formas [Jeremiah
Evarts,j Essays on the Present Crisis in the Condition of the American Indians; First
Published in the National Intelligencer,Under the Signatureof William Penn (Boston,
1829).
IndianPolicy
Jackson's
Andrew
539
tothemthanthosewhich
arelessfavorable
havetakenoftheirtrueinterests
theIndians
The policyofrescuing
to theWest."39
opposetheiremigration
so thatin
withwhitecivilization,
contact
of too-close
fromtheevil effects
in
the end theytoo mightbecomecivilized,receiveda finalbenediction
people-his "FarewellAddress"of
lastmessageto theAmerican
Jackson's
in theirimMarch4, 1837. "The Stateswhichhad so longbeenretarded
in themidstof themareat length
bytheIndiantribesresiding
provement
relievedfromthe evil," he said, "and thisunhappyrace-the original
wherewe maywell
dwellersin our land-are now placedin a situation
andbe savedfrom
of civilization
hopethattheywill sharein theblessings
to whichtheywere rapidlyhastening
and destruction
thatdegradation
of our
andcomfort
in theStates;andwhilethesafety
whiletheyremained
thephilanthrobytheirremoval,
promoted
owncitizenshavebeengreatly
racehas beenat length
of thatill-fated
pistwill rejoicethattheremnant
care
andthatthepaternal
placedbeyondthereachof injuryor oppression,
watchoverthemand protect
will hereafter
of the GeneralGovernment
them."40
mustnotlistentooeagerly
Indianpolicy,historians
In assessing
Jackson's
missionaries.
or
to
less-than-disinterested
politicalopponents
to Jackson's
who have acceptedtheir
criticsand thehistorians
contemporary
Jackson's
beentooharsh,ifnot,indeed,quitewrong.
havecertainly
arguments
I Richardson,Messagesand Papersof the Presidents,
II, 541.
40Ibid.,III, 294. See the discussion in John William Ward, AndrewJackson:
Symbol
foran Age (New York, 1955), 40-41.