There was a new debate in Congress about an act that would make the Native Americans move out of their homeland and into west America. It stirred many questions. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was at the time, thought to be justified and acceptable. There were two groups, the people who wanted the Indian’s gone, and the people who believed they should be allowed to stay. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 that forced the Indians out of their territory was immoral, had no effect on the state of Georgia, and it increased conflict between the Native American tribes.
When the Indians were being removed from their territory, they were lead out at gunpoint by the American military. It was immoral because there were 17,000 Indians and 4,000 died due to dehydration, starvation, and disease. The Cherokee had rights given to them. “They were granted their separate existence, as a political community, undisturbed possession and full enjoyment of their lands, within certain boundaries, which are duly defined and fully described and the protection of the United States against all in interference with, or encroachments upon, their rights, by any people, State, or nation,” argues a Maine Senator. As a result, it was truly unethical to kick the Indians out of their territory where they lived peacefully and under the rules. The Indian Removal Act disregards every set of promises that America had given to them. "What is the population of Georgia, where there is no room for these few Indians? It is less than seven to the square mile. We, Sir, in Massachusetts, have seventy-four to the square mile, and space for a great many more,” states a Massachusetts Congressman. The occupation of Indians in Georgia had little effect on the society or development of it. Georgia wanted to “consolidate their society” but they weren’t going to strengthen their community by kicking people out. Therefore, there was no reason for Georgia to kick out the Cherokees because they had done no...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document