The Influence Of Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase

Thomas Jefferson’s presidential actions are often less remembered than his work on the Declaration of Independence and his other Revolutionary War contributions, despite their impact on how the United States would, literally, take shape. There were many outcomes from his time in office, the eight years from 1801 to 1809, some good, others less so. Still, I believe that, on the whole, his administration benefited the nation. For one thing, President Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase added hundreds of thousands square miles to the size of the United States. Another, though less direct influence he had was that, in initiating the case of Marbury v. Madison, he unintentionally aided the Supreme Court in gaining the power to exercise judicial review.

On a down note, his Embargo Act of 1807 was devastating to the economy and did not last past his final term in office.
Jefferson’s most notable act as president was the Louisiana Purchase. This approximately doubled the size of the US for the very cheap price of about $15 million (Greenspan). In hindsight we can see the benefits of adding a large tract of land that stretched and expanded from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, but in the early 1800s, the acquisition was controversial, as it cost the new nation money that it did not have to spend and pushed presidential power past its constitutional limits. In Jefferson’s own words he had “stretched the Constitution until it cracked” (qtd. in Greenspan). This was an ironic situation for Jefferson since he believed in limiting the government’s power and his administration worked hard to reduce national debt. Weather for good or bad, Jefferson, being a founding father and only the third president, set an example of the executive head wielding more power than was originally intended.
This deal prevented the United States from being confined to the East Coast by a large chunk of France, or from fighting a war with France for that chunk of land.

It also allowed for continued easy trade through New Orleans, which was a major motivation to make the Purchase (History). However, it did have its negative consequences, namely that, while France may have sold the land, many Native Americans still considered it their home, and for Jefferson’s plan to fill the land with farmers to succeed, they would have to be removed, additionally much of the wildlife on this frontier suffered. Though this probably would have happened even if Jefferson did not make the purchase, his action did speed up the

process.
Though Jefferson was not as directly involved in the case of Marbury v.

Madison as he was in the Louisiana Purchase, he was still a key player in this episode that redefined the Judiciary branch of American government. Jefferson had just taken over the presidency from John Adams, a member of the rival Federalist Party, who, during his last days in office, had many of his fellow Federalists assigned offices in the Judiciary, including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall (Goldfield 277). Jefferson and his Secretary of State, James Madison, resented this Federalist grab for power and refused to give one of the appointees his position. This appointee, William Marbury, used the Judiciary Act of 1789 to take the issue to court (277). However Marshall, did not rule that Marbury be given his appointment by Jefferson, who had been actively removing Federalist Judges and would likely choose not to acknowledge Marshall’s authority (277). Marshall took a different approach, instead of giving Marbury his appointment, he declared the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional because it gave the Supreme Court authority that was beyond what was outlined in the Constitution (277). By taking away some of his own authority, Marshall gave the Supreme Court the formidable ability to declare laws unconstitutional (277). Interestingly, it would never have happened if Jefferson and his administration had not have taken action (or in this case lack of action) against the appointment

of so many new Federalist judges. Therefore, it is in part thanks to the presidency of Thomas Jefferson that the Supreme Court has the power it does today, and that rulings such as Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education, and others, both bad and good, were able to take place.
Unfortunately, not all of Jefferson’s decision while in office helped the new country. During the same period as Jefferson’s presidency, the Napoleonic wars were being waged in Europe. Jefferson wanted the United States to remain neutral, but in the face of increasing hostilities, particularly by the British impressment of American sailors and the Chesapeake Incident, he recognized that some sort of action needed to be taken, regrettably, the path he chose was damaging to the United States. The Embargo Act of 1807 kept US ships from leaving the country and was meant to starve Europe of American products, thereby compelling Brittan to allow American ships to go on their trade routes without harassment (Goldfield 231). However, this logic was flawed. Prices did rise to an extent in England, but not as much as had been hoped, and goods were still obtained from trade with South America and with smugglers (“Embargo”). On the other hand, there was consequences in the United States. Many people were left with nowhere to sell their produce, some resorted to smuggling as mentioned above, and others voiced their disapproval of the Act and of Jefferson (Goldfield 231-2). As a result of these things, the Act did not live through Jefferson’s presidency and was exchanged for the Nonintercourse Act, which only prohibited trade the Brittan and France, instead of all Europe (232).
On the whole, Thomas Jefferson’s presidency did have a beneficial impact on the United States. He peacefully doubled the country’s size through the Louisiana Purchase, and his decisions led to the case of Marbury v. Madison, thus to the increase of Judiciary authority and balancing the power of the government’s branches, the effects of which are still felt today. Thought his terms of office were not perfect, as evidenced by both the effects, and lack thereof, of the Embargo Act of 1807, I believe that the ill effects the nation felt are outweighed by the benefits of Mr. Jefferson’s presidency.