arguments against Indian removal
From the book, going to The Source the Bedford Reader in American History Volume 1. To 1877 written by Victoria Bissell Brown and Timothy J. Shannon offer arguments against Indian removal. Both Elias Boudinot and Jeremiah Evarts presented arguments against Indian removal through the use of a different type of arguments. Jeremiah Evarts was one of the leading opponents of Indian removal in general (Brown, & Shannon, 187). He opposed the Indian removal because he advocated for unity of the country through the significant influence of the religious principles of daily behaviors. He opposed Indian removal aiming at the promotion of the principles of revolution through individual civil reforms (Brown, & Shannon, 188). Hence, his view was that the united states’ actions against the Indians were a great moral wrong. So for Jeremiah Evarts, he was against Indian removal because he thought it was morally wrong, and there was a need for adopting revolution through individual and civil reforms.
On the other hand, Elias Boudinot also opposed the removal of Indians but offering different argument as opposed to Jeremiah Evarts’s argument (Brown, & Shannon, 191). Elias Boudinot opposed the removal of Indians, aiming at the protection of the nation’s territory. This was achieved through the enacting of laws that prohibited selling the national land, which would later call for a penalty of death (Brown & Shannon 182). To sum up, Elias Boudinot’s opposed Indian removal with the argument of protecting the national territory and advocating that the national land should not be sold.
In conclusion, both Elias Boudinot and Jeremiah Evarts were opposing Indian removal even though they gave different arguments for it. For Jeremiah Evarts, he opposed Indian removal because it was morally wrong what the US government was doing to them, and he advocated for a revolution. On the other hand, Elias Boudinot opposed Indian removal aiming at protecting national territory.
References
Brown, V. B., & Shannon, T. J. (2019). Going to the Source, Volume I: To 1877. 183- 202