Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Democratic-republicans vs federalists
Andrew Jackson's presidency
Ap us history andrew jackson dbq
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Democratic-republicans vs federalists
“The Bank is trying to kill me, Sir, but I shall kill it!”
This is what our president and leader, Andrew Jackson, said regarding the Second Bank of the United States. I believe this is an insult to all people, rich and poor. He hath violated indeed violated the separation of powers in his actions to destroy the Bank of the United States. He, and not I, sparked the Bank War with his criticism. With great urging from fellow member Henry Clay, I applied for the Bank’s re-charter in January of 1832. As many know, this was four years the original charter was supposed to expire. With our second charter, the goal was to make President Jackson look unwise in his decisions and unpopular during election year in 1837. But behold! The President vetoed the bill. And what could I do? Nothing! Our plan of blackening Andrew Jackson’s name failed, as he was reelected again, beating Clay, whom I had supported greatly through the Bank.
…show more content…
Oh, he was far from it! In September of 1833, he ordered his Treasury secretary to move money carefully selected state banks, which I will now refer to as “pet” banks. Seeing this as a terribly unconstitutional move, the secretary resigned, preferring not to obey Jackson’s order. Quickly following this incident, his enemies in the Senate formally declared his actions as unconstitutional. After crippling the Bank, Jackson prohibited all banks from federal deposits. His stiff-necked effort to limit bank note circulation was a foolish idea and he turned a blind eye in seeing the importance of a banking system in our growing economy. Therefore, unconstitutional actions must be
As the author of Andrew Jackson and the Search for Vindication, James C. Curtis seems to greatly admire Andrew Jackson. Curtis pointed out that Jackson was a great American general who was well liked by the people. As history shows, Andrew Jackson had his flaws; for example, he thought the National Bank of the United States was going to kill him but he was determined to kill it first. He resented the Bank because he thought it was the reason for the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson was elected to the presidency in 1824 after first being nominated in 1822. He was sixty-one when he was elected the seventh president of the United States.
Recognizing the injustices president Andrew Jackson performed, Americans have considered the dispute over the removal of Jackson 's face from the twenty dollar bill. The real question remains why place America 's figures in iconic positions based on fame? Benedict Arnold is famous, yet he was a traitor to America . Why not place figures that contributed to the well-being of the country and upheld humane morals? Jackson 's administration only improved the system, initiating the progress toward a modern democratic government. Under President Jackson, the elimination of voter property qualifications allowed a variety of citizens from different social classes to elect government officials 1. Jackson also ended the national banks that resembled the greedy monopolies of the late 1800's 1.
To begin with , Andrew Jackson was democratic and this can be proven in political ways. Andrew Jackson was a guy that supported the people and the
The issue of whether or not America should have a National Bank is one that is debated throughout the whole beginning stages of the modern United States governmental system. In the 1830-1840’s two major differences in opinion over the National Bank can be seen by the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig parties. The Jacksonian Democrats did not want a National Bank for many reasons. One main reason was the distrust in banks instilled in Andrew Jackson because his land was taken away. Another reason is that the creation of a National Bank would make it more powerful than...
Andrew Jackson has been described as a great hero of his time and a man who was atrocious and would destroy the Union. Andrew Jackson accomplished a great number of things during his life but some of his actions were quite questionable. Looking from the present to the past gives insight into areas where the events can be examined more objectively. However, it is vital when examining past events to keep in mind the mindsets of the past. People had a different point of view and a different perspective than the current one. This must be kept in the forward part of the mind to understand the actions of those in the past. This paper will serve as a guide into the life of Andrew Jackson, his trials and tribulations, decisions and contradictions. From the beginning of his life, he was headstrong and that would lead him straight into the history books.
Andrew Jackson was like no other president before him. The previous presidents had one thing in common, they were all part of the founding fathers or in John Quincy Adam’s case was the son of a founding father. However Jackson was a plantation owner from the west who had no connections with the government. He also had different views from other presidents that made his presidency unique. Two things that separated Andrew Jackson’s presidency from previous presidencies were he reached out to the common people and he was disapproving of the Bank of United States.
Throughout the Jacksonian era the Jacksonians proved to be violators of the United States Constitution and not the guardians they believed themselves to be. Both the Jacksonians and President Jackson went against the Supreme Courts regarding cases that were said to be constitutional. An instance in which the Jacksonian Democrats violated the Constitution was in the "Trail of Tears". The Supreme Court stated that the Jacksonian Democrats' actions were unconstitutional because they had issued the "Indian Removal Act". By doing this, they were in violation of the treaty of New Echota. In the 1832 decision Worcester v. Georgia, Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the Cherokees had their own land and that they did not need to follow Georgia law in their own territory. This ruling of the Supreme Court did not stop Jacksonians from driving the Cherokees off of their land. Jackson used the Constitution to benefit himself when he vetoed the national bank, even after the Supreme Court had already ruled that the bank was constitutional. When South Carolina declared a reduced tariff void and threatened to secede, President Jackson responded in an unconstitutionally. He threatened to send militia to enforce the tariff and the Jacksonian Congress passed a bill approving this military force, if necessary. This was in direct violation of the Constitution. They continued to violate the Constitution by placing censors on the mail and intercepting abolitionist literature or mail into or from the south. This was an infringement on the Constitution because it violated the first amendment.
In the summer of 1832 and Congress renewed the Bank’s charter even though it wasn’t due until 1836. Jackson hesitated to approve of the charter, so Henry Clay and Nicholas Biddle went on the offensive to attempt to persuade Jackson to pass the bill. Jackson, having had his opinion on the banks cemented by Clay’s presence in the organization, then committed to de-establishing the Second National Bank. He waged war against Biddle in particular to make sure Biddle lost power. He vetoed the bank bill, and after winning the race to be reelected, he closed Biddle’s bank. He ordered his Secretary of the Treasury to move money from the Second National Bank to smaller, state banks. When Congress returned from its summer recess, it censured him for his actions. In 1836, Bank of US was dead, and the new democratic-congressmen expunged Jackson’s censure. Because Jackson had no formal plan for managing the nation’s funds after the Second National Bank closed, it caused problems in Van Buren’s administration. He destroyed the Bank of the United States, in the main, for personal reasons. Jackson hated the bank before his presidency because as a wealthy land and slave owner he had lost money due to its fiscal policies. He believed that Congress had no right under the constitution to charter a
view supporting those ideals and it comes as no surprise that Jackson stressed them in his veto message of 1832. Yet, paying attention to the message in context lends a lot of support to the view that Jackson was a true democrat and a true protector of the common man. Established in 1816, the Second Bank of the United States had, by the 1830's, become a tool of the rich Northeastemers that failed to respond to the people and states' needs.
Andrew Jackson is one of the most controversial presidents. Many regard him as a war hero, the father of the Democratic Party, an inspiring leader, and a spokesman for the common man. While there is plenty to praise about the seventh president, his legacy is tarnished by his racism, disregard for the law of the land, cruelty towards the Native Americans, and ruthless temper. Jackson was an intriguing man who was multi-faceted. One must not look at a singular dimension, and cast judgment on him as a whole. To accurately evaluate one of the most complex presidents, it is crucial to observe Jackson from all possible angles. Prior lifestyle, hardships in life, political ideology, lifestyle of the time, political developments, and his character
In fighting against an aristocratic economic overtake, like many before, the Jacksonian Democrats were vehemently opposed to the encroachment upon individual economic equality. For Andrew Jackson, that threat was the Second Bank of the United States. Criticizing the National Bank because, “it appears that more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners and the ...
During The Jacksonian Era many different views and ideas were predominant about the United States. The Jacksonian Democrats were a loose coalition of different peoples and interests pulled together by a common practical idea. That idea was that they all were followers of President Andrew Jackson. Jacksonian Democrats viewed themselves as guardians of the Constitution when in fact they were not. When dealing with politics and ideas within the Democratic Party of the time the Jacksonians proved to be both guardians and violators of the Constitution. Individual liberty is another area in which the Jacksonians were advocates to different sides of the topic at different times. The Jacksonians also proved to be champions for equality of economic opportunity. The Jacksonians demonstrated themselves to be, not the proponents they thought they were, but instead violators of the US Constitution.
The bank would be more for the rich and the foreign, but have no benefits for the poor. Jackson’s political rival, Daniel Webster, believes that this letter from Jackson showed just how evil Jackson was. Webster does not think Jackson was vetoing for the good of the people, but to ‘stir the pot’. By Jackson sending this letter, it causes a stir between the rich and the poor. The poor would feel imbalanced against the poor, and arguments would rush out.
Andrew Jackson had many significant contributions to the democratic state of the country. One of those contributions, as stated in document B, was Jackson’s victory of the 1928 Presidential election. What this election did was accelerate the transfer of power from the national elite to the common-man; the universal-white-men now had a larger role in the government. As the graph in document A shows, the methods of electing Presidential electors before Jackson’s Presidency was for-the-most-part dominated by state legislature, it was during Jackson’s administration by which the people were electing Presidential electors. As President, Jackson sought to rid the government of all its corrupt officials. This is backed up by the information in document D, which states that Jackson believed that the offices should be rotated every four years and filled by the people. The same document states that Jackson believed the president should serve a single term of no more than four or six years; the senators should have similar constraints with subjection to removal. All of this was fueled by his theory that there was more to be gained with the rotation of office holders that the long continuance of them and that office were not created to give certain men support rather than help the people, as ex...
The validity of President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Bank War issue has been contradicted by many, but his reasoning was supported by fact and inevitably beneficial to the country. Jackson’s primary involvement with the Second Bank of the United States arose during the suggested governmental re-chartering of the institution. It was during this period that the necessity and value of the Bank’s services were questioned.