Comparing Thomas Jefferson's, James Monroe, And James K. Polk

791 Words2 Pages

Many problems arise during one’s presidential term. During Thomas Jefferson’s, James Monroe’s, and James K. Polk’s term, each faced new pressure from foreign governments with their own solutions to them. Throughout Jefferson’s term, many began to worry what France’s action would do to the United States. After news broke out about France acquiring the Louisiana territory from Spain, “Americans reacted with alarm. [With Jefferson fearing] that a strong French presence in the midcontinent would force the United States into an alliance with Britain” (Danzer). To deal with the rising concern for the U.S citizen, Jefferson had James Monroe and American Ambassador Robert Livingston to France to buy New Orleans and western Florida. Since Napoleon gave …show more content…

After Spain defeated France, “European powers wanted to reclaim their former colonies…[and] Russia pushing in from the northwest,” which could threaten U.S trade with China, Monroe and Congress had to figure out a plan quickly (Danzer). Monroe’s plan, with the help of Congress, called the Monroe Doctrine, was a warning to European powers to not interfere with Western business and any actions doing so will be considered a threat. Monroe’s plan like Jefferson did not cause any major war with European powers. President James K. Polk’s, on the other hand, ideas to fix his problems to foreign governments was more blood shedding. With the annexation of Texas and increase of slavery in that state, Mexico becomes increasingly incensed towards the U.S. Furthermore, “Polk’s offer to buy California...aroused the indignation of the Mexican government,” which cause war to break out between Mexico and the U.S (Danzer). This war cost 25,000 lives of Mexicans and 13,000 lives of Americans. In the end, every president will have problems and how each president chooses to deal with their problems can be peaceful to war …show more content…

Westerners favor American expansions to increase opportunities such as economic gains, spreading of nationalism and social gains. Expansion also meant more territory could become its own state with Congress approval. Places like Missouri could become a slave or free state when they wanted. Although people in Missouri chose to be a slave state, a compromise had to be made before hand to keep slave states and free states equal. Which is where the Missouri Compromise came in, stating that “Maine was [to be] admitted as a free state and Missouri as a slave state, thus preserving” balance (Danzer). This led Missouri to become the state it chose to while keeping everything balance. When President Andrew Jackson came to term, he carried out the “Indian Removal Act”. An act that forced many Indians out of their homes and “provided funds to...to forced the Native Americans to move west” to a place they had never seen before (Danzer). This walk was title the “Trail of Tears” as many elderly and young died from the cold whether and little shelter. Although the Supreme Court forbid the “Indian Removal Act,” Jackson still carried it out so his people, his voters, would gain more land to farm and

Open Document