How would Samuel A. Worcester most likely view the end result of the legal battle between Georgia and the Cherokee people?
~He would be happy because he wanted the Cherokee to be moved to the west.
~He would be surprised because he expected the Supreme Court to rule in his favor.
~He would be disappointed because he argued for the Cherokees' right to their land.
~He would be surprised because he expected Georgians to change their minds about Indian Removal.
Can someone please help me? It will be greatly appreciated, Thanks!
~Lexi
dam its been 2 years and you still didn't get an answer 😢
B. He would be surprised because he expected the Supreme Court to rule in his favor.
Samuel A. Worcester was a missionary who staunchly advocated for the rights of the Cherokee people during their legal battle with Georgia. Given his beliefs and actions, it is most likely that he would be disappointed with the end result of the legal battle. The correct option is: He would be disappointed because he argued for the Cherokees' right to their land.
To understand how Samuel A. Worcester would most likely view the end result of the legal battle between Georgia and the Cherokee people, we need to analyze his position and views. Samuel A. Worcester was an American missionary who lived among the Cherokee people and advocated for their land rights during the era of Indian Removal in the 1830s.
Based on his known positions and objectives, we can eliminate a couple of the options. Samuel A. Worcester did not support the relocation of the Cherokee people to the west, so he would not be happy if they were moved. Therefore, we can eliminate the option stating that he would be pleased with that outcome.
Regarding the option that he would be surprised because he expected the Supreme Court to rule in his favor, we need to consider the legal context. Worcester and his colleague, Elizur Butler, were arrested and convicted for residing in Cherokee territory without obtaining a license from the State of Georgia. They challenged their convictions and their case was eventually brought before the Supreme Court in Worcester v. Georgia in 1832. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Worcester, affirming the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation and stating that Georgia did not have the power to control the tribe or the land. However, Georgia refused to comply with the Supreme Court's decision, which led to the federal government's failure to enforce the ruling. Considering this, it is reasonable to assume that Samuel A. Worcester, while hopeful for a favorable decision, would not be surprised by Georgia's refusal to recognize and implement the Supreme Court's ruling. Thus, we can eliminate this option as well.
Now we are left with two options: he would be disappointed because he argued for the Cherokees' right to their land, or he would be surprised because he expected Georgians to change their minds about Indian Removal.
Considering Worcester's dedication to advocating for the Cherokee people's land rights, it is likely that he would be disappointed with the end result of the legal battle. The court's ruling in favor of the Cherokee people's sovereignty would have given him hope, but the failure to enforce that ruling and the eventual forced removal of the Cherokee people along the Trail of Tears would have been a significant blow to his cause and the rights he fought for.
In conclusion, based on his known positions and the historical context, it is most probable that Samuel A. Worcester would be disappointed with the end result of the legal battle between Georgia and the Cherokee people because he argued for the Cherokees' right to their land.