Congressional Research Service
CRS TESTIMONY
Prepared for Congress —————————————————————————————————
In the New Echota Treaty, the Cherokee signatories agreed to relinquish their eastern lands and remove
their Nation to new territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, tens of thousands of members of the
Cherokee underwent a forced trek westward known as the Trail of Tears.
The Treaty signing occurred
during an era when one of the federal government’s policy goals was removal of Indian tribes to unsettled
lands in the west, freeing eastern lands for non-Indian settlers.
The parties entered into the Treaty
three
years after the Supreme Court, in Worcester v. Georgia,
rejected Georgia’s attempt to exercise authority
within Cherokee country.
Thus, at a time when the Cherokees were suffering “increasing abuse from
white settlers,” the United States “signed a treaty with the supporters of removal”
among the Cherokees.
However, because the signatories did not include Cherokee leaders,
the New Echota Treaty appears to
have lacked the support of the majority of the Cherokee Tribe.
Those who signed the New Echota Treaty assented to a Preamble stating that they desired to move west
and establish a permanent homeland for their entire Nation.
Under Article 16 of the Treaty, the Cherokee
illustrate the liberal and enlarged policy of the Government of the United States towards the Indians in their
removal beyond the territorial limits of the States, it is stipulated that they shall be entitled to a delegate in the
House of Representatives of the United States whenever Congress shall make provision for the same.
According to one scholar: “The ratification of the Treaty of New Echota ‘legalized’ the forced removal of Cherokees from their
Georgia and Tennessee homeland and led directly to the infamous Trail of Tears.” Ezra Rosser, The Nature of Representation:
The Cherokee Right to a Congressional Delegate, 15 B.U. PUB. INT. L.J. 91, 91–92 (2005). See also Chadwick Smith & Faye
Teague, The Response of the Cherokee Nation to the Cherokee Outlet Centennial Celebration: A Legal and Historical Analysis,
29 TULSA L.J. 263, 273 (1993) (“This treaty was the basis for the infamous Trail of Tears. In Article 1, the Cherokees
relinquished to the United States all their lands east of the Mississippi.”).
In 1830, Congress enacted what is known as the Removal Act “[t]o provide for an exchange of lands with the Indians residing
in any of the states or territories, and for their removal west of the river Mississippi.” Act of May 28, 1830, ch. 148, 4 Stat. 411.
New Echota Treaty, 7 Stat. 478, 478 (“Articles of a treaty, concluded at New Echota in the State of Georgia on the 29th day
Decr. 1835 by General William Carroll and John F. Schermerhorn commissioners on the part of the United States and the Chiefs
Head Men and People of the Cherokee tribe of Indians.”).
Worcester, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) at 561 (Marshall, C.J.) (“The Cherokee nation, then, is a distinct community, occupying its own
territory, with boundaries accurately described, in which the laws of Georgia can have no force, and which the citizens of
Georgia have no right to enter, but with the assent of the Cherokees themselves, or in conformity with treaties, and with the acts
of [C]ongress.”).
The dispute over state jurisdiction within the Cherokee reservation has reached the Supreme Court twice. In Cherokee Nation
v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1 (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832), the Supreme Court essentially
upheld the United States’ authority, ruling Georgia lacked authority to enforce its laws within the Cherokee territory. For a
discussion of the dispute, see GRANT FOREMAN, INDIAN REMOVAL 229–50 (1932); FRANCIS PAUL PRUCHA, AMERICAN INDIAN
TREATIES: THE HISTORY OF A POLITICAL ANOMALY 156–82 (1994).
1 COHEN’S HANDBOOK OF FEDERAL INDIAN LAW § 1.03, (4)(a).
Id. § 1.03 n.176 (“When the unauthorized treaty was signed, Principal Chief John Ross was actually in Washington, D.C.
petitioning for relief from abuse and trespass committed by Georgian soldiers and settlers against Cherokees and their lands.”
(citing COLIN G. CALLOWAY, PEN & INK WITCHCRAFT: TREATIES AND TREATY MAKING IN AMERICAN INDIAN HISTORY 145
(2013))). See also Rosser, supra note 14, at 92 (“An influential minority ultimately rebelled against Ross’s leadership and signed
the Treaty of New Echota on behalf of the Cherokee majority who did not share the treaty-signers’ perspectives . . . . Presented
officially by the administration of President Andrew Jackson as bringing with them liberal terms for the Cherokees, the U.S.
negotiators for the Treaty of New Echota bypassed the elected Cherokee leadership.”).
See H.R. DOC. NO. 25-316, at 1–2, 7 (1838) (“The Cherokee Delegation submitting the memorial and protest of the Cherokee
people to Congress” claimed there were 15,665 signatures protesting that the New Echota Treaty was concluded by
“unauthorized individual Cherokees . . . [and] a violation of the fundamental principles of justice, and an outrage on the primary
rules of national intercourse, as well as of the known laws and usages of the Cherokee nation; and, therefore, to be destitute of
any binding force on us.”). For further historical discussion, including Principal Chief Ross’s efforts to prevent ratification and a
U.S. soldier’s characterization of the treaty as “no treaty at all,” see, e.g., Carl J. Vipperman, The Bungled Treaty of New Echota:
The Failure of Cherokee Removal, 1836-1838, 73 GA. HIST. Q. 540, 540 (1989), http://www.jstor.org/stable/40582016 (“Even
friends of President Andrew Jackson’s administration condemned the treaty as a fraud on the Cherokee people . . . .”).
New Echota Treaty, 7 Stat. 478, 478 (“[T]he Cherokees are anxious to make some arrangements with the Government of the
United States whereby the difficulties they have experienced by a residence within the settled parts of the United States under the