Claudio is codirector of the center for virtual history and associate director of the institute of native american studies at the university of georgia. He is author of three previous books on American History. West of the revolution, black, white, indian and a new order of things. And to thank you so much for joining us. Thank you so much for hosting and thanked the center for sponsoring thiss event. Unworthy republic challenges thet idea that so many historis have presented at the expulsion of native americans as an inevitability rate you uncover a lot of evidence of political and economic motivation so how much land first indians own in the southeast in the decades before the 1830s . They owned a huge amount, half of alabama, two thirds what became mississippi, about a fifth of georgia. And its not just how much land they own, but how valuable that land was for his mom the most valuable Agricultural Land probably in the entire world at the time. The removal covered the entire United States. We read largely the southern story glass and removed as well. They are much smaller plots of land. You do cover a number of other tribes, tribes who were also expelled from new york, ohio, he notes different to tribe and state to state. But generally what rights or autonomy did indian tablet say in the south . You are right that it buried. It was also contested it is still contested to this day. But they were until a series of court cases fully sovereign people. The only limitation being they could not sell their land to a foreign the cherokees could not sell their property to france for example. Otherwise there fully sovereign people. They had elections. They had court systems. They had constitutions. The same way as the United States there is sovereign in the early 19th century. Beef for the drive to dispossess americas of the native lands in the 1830s to prevailing u. S. Policy toward indians pretty much since the jeffersonian era was a civilization us. Could you give us an overview of how indians lived with that approach . X we also call it i jeffersonian indian policy. This was a federal policy from the beginning of the republic it was ethnocentric. Sometimes wellintentioned. Sometimes not the ultimate goal is to civilize these people that is to teach them english, to turn them into good christians, to make them a farm in the same way as white farmers did. That is with up plaut rather than a coat. To get out there seasonal punt. To dress like white people. So in short, and always to turn them into good u. S. Citizens. And this was the policy. It was a policy of the native people pushed back on and many, many ways. They also embraced parts of it. Sometimes they did that sincerely and sometimes they did that strategically in order to make their way in the shadow of the republic. The election of Andrew Jackson in 1820 was an absolute game changer in that policy. He ran on the promise to solve the quote indian question by pushing indians west of the mississippi. This was presented as a humanitarian solution to rescue indians from extinction. So what evidence did proponents have for this . And how is that framed . Is the fascinating part of the story. I should preface this by saying at the onset they had been dispossessed of their land from the first moment the europeans set foot on the continent. Between the founding of the republic in 1830 plots the native people and they lost thousands of acres of land. But until the removal act which was there was no formal, consistent, federal policy to dispossess native people. It really was a significant moment in the history of relations between native peoples to get this act this piece of legislation through congress, the advocates of the policy needed to find a i allies. They needed to put up a good front. They could not say simply we want their land in alabama and mississippi. Instead they had to say this was the best thing for them. And if you, as a congressman really careded about native people, if you cared about their welfare and their future, then you would support this policy. Though probably the key piece of evidence which they presented and they distributed in the popular press and numerous articles that they planted was that the indigenous populations were diminishing. If it were to remain they would go extinct. And so they pointed to the significant decrease of the native population. Which certainly had occurred between 1500 and 1820s. Everybody knew the populations had diminished. But the dynamics are quite complicated. In the best evidence shows that in the early 19th century these populations in the United States, the business populations were stable and possibly even developed. People pushed backward to set it over and over again. They were frustrated they cannot get this message out. Cherokees and creeks writing to congress, to the president saying you keep repeating this over and over again that we are diminishing. We are not. We may be small in number but we are a growing population i would to stay where we are. It is the voice of the natives. Let say those were diplomats printing pamphlets, petitions by the thousands against indian removal. It is well known that indian removal as it was genteel he by jackson was a signature policy. What was new to meet with these kinds of arguments for and against expulsion and who is making them pray there was a vigorous opposition to indian removal. Who was aligned in that opposition . And how organized was it . X obviously the most fervent opposition was rooted in the indigenous communities. That is not to say native people were unanimous. There were a number of people who simply wanted to cut their losses. They did not think this was a just a policy necessarily. They found that in fact given the tremendous pressure they were on and the squatters who moving in and the effect of State Government and the federal government were not protecting way. In any in fact they were encouraging squatters to steal their land and theirat property. Given that fact the best thing to do was to cut them off and leave. But the people in fact did to state. They were deeply rooted in the land for their very practical reasons why they wanted to stay. So had a dealer connection to the limits of their ancestors were. They wanted to stay there. I was most fervent opposition of the indigenous community. They did find allies in missionaries. He lived among them and also church based groups in the north. In fact this is single most controversial issue to come before the republic up to that date. It prompted the first mass Petition Campaign to congress there were thousands and thousands of americans in the north who dropped petition to both men and women. That was novel at the time because women were not seem to be appropriate participants in the political process. But they drafted petitions and wrote these heartfelt and deeply critical petitions to Congress Asking all be able to stay in their homelands. Meanwhile Southern Newspapers were condemning the northern piety and hypocrisy. Orion georgia journal from 1825 thing if you want to make indian citizens, will be next. Thats a critical part of your analysis. The expulsion of natives in expansion of slavery were really intertwined. However protections for slavery exposed an argument they were making for indian removal . Parts in so many ways these two issues more deeply, deeply connected. The first that we talked about was thehe native people were on this valuable cotton producing land. As part of fertile soil that runs through georgia and alabama. Runs right through the judicial homelands in the chickasaw nation. They had experience with moving people because they had been engaged in first the transatlantic and then engaged in the interstate trade. Ts though they were used two commanding people and having absolute right over people of color. So to have people of color that is in ander did just americans living in the south and not command, not under their thumb wasnt insult to white supremacy. I think that was also very much a part of their antagonism and their ability. You are disintegrating the union if you force this on us from the north. Also confrontations in congress per than the indian removal act passes in 1835 by five votes. In states rights realizing the jackson government to forcibly remove tens of thousands of native people perjured anyone jacksons administration question expulsion . What so you are right. As you say they need need in west of the mississippi they did the federal government to pay for it and supervise there were a few folks who voiced some quiet opposition to this policy. Jackson quickly force them out. And appointed and their place. There congressman certainly who, in both parties who opposed aindian removal. Her stories jackson went around rightly political careers of these people and said its going to be the end of your career this threat was as threatening as a threat the tremendous amount of armtwisting and wheeling and dealing that went on behind the scenes. At amiri five votes of 199 passed in the cows house but did barely squeak through. Congress was overwhelmingly jacksonian. The southern planters also needed bankers to new york city, boston, london as itth turned ot used trails of money to bankroll this expulsion. Refer to them as the northern equivalent of southern planters. That is one of the revelation of your book, following on the money was made and how the money was spent actual player who was c and y with tm people like him critical to the expulsion credit contract . On the most surprising part ofof the story i think i stumbld across in my research. I just kept following trails. Jd peers as he was commonly called was probably the central player on wall street and financing thisop operation. He was born and raised in connecticut. Then moved to new york city this is when wall street was really just emerging as a center for american finance. We kind of got in on the ground floor. It became one of the important planners on wall street. 1820s he was busy insurance and financing crop cultivation in the south. He knew from a distance. And saw this opportunity emerging we recognize instantly relate valuable land available wanted to get his hands on it. Inform the joint stock company. It is not alone by the way. Every single banker in philadelphia, new york was involved in speculating in the 1830s. They had vastle quantities but massive amount of land in mississippi. Its in the most fertile land in the state. And then they flipped it for enormous profits. They earn ten, sometimes 30 times what they had invested in this property. It is interesting that is a financial circuits lead back to wall street. They also cross the atlantic. There are lending and banking houses that are also speculating and investing at the same time. Wild. A speculation and corruption also certainly. When companies springing up. Especially for land west of the ahchattahoochee river. 53000 people when government lottery for access to land appropriate by the state. Or talking fourpoint to million acres. The majority of cherokee, chickasaw did not want to leavee will be millions of dollars in land sales mean for indian tourists on the land refusing to leave . That vary nation to nation. Each treaty was distinct and have legal technicalities that made a difference. The end result was the same. Generally speaking lands were flooded with hundreds of thousands of dollars. An unwilling sellers. It was to separate these people from their land as cheaply as possible. They knew they could later flip the land for enormous profit. There were different strategies. But then, sometimes they captured indians. Pa basically chained up and said were not going to frequently make a mark on this piece of paper which is basically a deed transferring property. Or they beat them. They would sometimes sees orphans and then go before a judge i would say oh yes, this is on the up and up. Cs they can sell his or her inheritance for repentance. They hired impersonators. Chickasaw indians at the time some of them were literally close to starvation. Speculators would show up and say will give you 10 if you go before this judge and so you are indeed such and such a person, even if you are not. Just make your mark on this piece of paper. Sometimes the same indian did that literally hundreds ofs times. Its just a firestorm of fraud and violence that unfolded. Probably the worst of that was in alabama right across the chattahoochee river. They are based in columbus, georgia. Proxy stories are just incredible that you tell the book t. Purveyors are dragging their chains right to somebodys field. People buying land i went right up to the porch for the doorstep of other people. Some people leaving their homes and coming back and finding squatters in them. Its a disgrace. Its a pivotal time not only in the history of Indigenous People but also for young republic eager to flex its administrative muscle. I think with the triumphs of the book is tracking governance accounts showing how woefully incapable that was for that task. You have some examples of how those limitations played out . Xo, theres about 80000 people in the federal government wanted to do porch bird which does not sound like a a lot. Like a lot in 21st century terms but it was a huge operation or a very small young republic had but eight or 9000 employees. 7000 of them worked for the post office. But they were completely overwhelm with logistics. They had not been involved in any operation to this extent. Humanitarian operations purportedly in the sense theyre not moving soldiers around who are cooperating willingly moving and direction youre telling them too. Families, their infants, their pregnant women, their elderly folks there are infirmed people. They are m trained by the hundrs may be a thousand miles to the west and their roads that dont exist for they have to build those. Maps are atrocious they do not know where they are going. Do not have weather reports they get caught in severe winter storms lead to people shivering in the cold for weeks on end. So they are completely overwhelmed by the logistics of it. They simply do not have the capabilities. The other things they dont really care that much people of color t. So there is a certain disregard at theat end of the day it doest really matter that much to mostt of these were involved in the operation that these people are suffering that much. But you have one quick example is well over 1000 who get stranded on the of the Arkansas River the winter of 1833. Most of them do not have closed to keep them warm. There are a handful of tents. The steamboats are not for they are supposed to be. There are a few supplies to feed these people. Some of them sit there for six, to eight weeks waiting for the river to soften they can continue their journey westward. Thats one of numerous examples of the failure of the federal government to see this operation through in a way that had promised people in 1830. There are a number of cogs in this wheel. Brings a lot of life to the accounts but one is George Gibson is ahead of the removal budget for the war department. His dimension known to calculate cost of the fractions of a penny. And having preciseon instructios on how to fold up the reports. The account for decades worth i believe he is a man when somebody sympathetic field officer appealed for funds to help feed these people on Arkansas River is its a disagreeable state of things but everything must be done to influence their selfreliance. S there is this absolute lack of care. Hundreds of marches relentlessly grandma made even worse when it breaks out of the midwest and cholera is carried by the soldiers. Learning about this misery, where to go to as a historian when youre reading about this . A yes. Some of the stories are really hard to deal with. Astounding to see these records in the federal archives recording all of this. These records that are in these boxes and are these crumbling records atrocious in advance. The challenge of covering the story presenting them in a way thats understandable. Women during the research. It was a depressing project in a lot of ways. Theres ann important one. I was amazed by the kinds of evidence that was just sitting there in the federalfo archive. He mentioned George Gibson the commissary generals. He is in chargehi of supplying food. If you read there is correspondence before 1830 sending so many pounds of beef, or pork to such and such a pork here or there. The old friend of jacksons. He had known jackson beforen 1812. Within this operation the authority away from the superintendent and give it to the commentary. It was meticulous. Both obsess with every dollar in every sense given to the fraction of a penny or these accounts theres thousands and thousands of pages eight note we certainly cannot afford this we should not pay for them. It indian agent had wrote back with an account that would be 83. 32. He would say you have miscalculated that by a fraction of a penny. Please revise this and send it back. He is obsessed with this but he does not see the bigger picture. He does not see the human misery that this has created. The rush that he himself is overseeing. One of the somethings that were not afforded along the way . Of medicine was one of the big ones. Two people on the ground, some of them were more sympathetic to the peoples they were moving in summer last. But it is hard to be unsympathetic when you were right there watching suffering. Some of these agents would say it is preposterous to move 1000 people 800 miles you have a women and children and to not have any medicine. Or to not have a doctor. Why would you not pay for a doctor . I would write back i am not authorized to pay for that. Are the number of wagons available to move stuff. Our fees to pay for indian ponies. Some of the most viable properties native people had. The government would not pay to feed the animals. We are not authorized to pay for that. He underscored over and over again economy is the single most important thing here. Youre trying to save money. The people who were deported thats a polite word, charged with the cost of the deportation order. What with some of things they are billed for . This is really an awful part of thehe story. They have to pay for their own removal. And so the chickasaw or received a bill. This goes on and on a decade after the fact the government is still trying to rectify. The chickasaw receiveda a billa decade later. Theyre looking at it as does the x number of people moved by what they write back and said this is not right. We had only a fraction of people. Or we had to pay for the rations of so many people but they died. They died soon after we set out and youre still billing us for rations in the indian territory. They are billed for the cost of postage. They are billed for any for the horse of it indian agent. They are billed for pencils. They are billed for the commentary general they are billed theres labor the accountants who are wo