Find » Society » History » A Negative View of Jackson's Presid...

A Negative View of Jackson's Presidency

By Joshua Nili, published Jun 25, 2007
Published Content: 23  Total Views: 16,570  Favorited By: 1 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 4.7 of 5
President Andrew Jackson is known as a great man, a great president who went above and beyond the expectations set forth for him by the general public. President Jackson laid claim to all the land east of the Mississippi and made it habitable, yet in doing so he supposedly stretched beyond the limits of his power. Regardless of his actions, he is viewed by some as one of the country's greatest presidents. Although he had personal motives in mind that he believed were for the betterment of the country, he continuously made severe extensions of power that should never have been permitted to occur. Andrew Jackson's personality also contributed to his abusive attitude toward the presidency. This was a very serious issue that was proved true time and time again, especially in the case of the Trail of Tears, the Spoils System, and the affair with the Bank of the U.S.
During the reign of President Jackson, a large portion of land east of the Mississippi River and West of the Appalachian Mountains was populated with Native Americans. Regardless of the claim they made to their land, Jackson believed that the land was American, and believed that no interference should be made by those whom he considered to be savages. Jackson chose to take excessive measures by forcing all Native Americans west of the Mississippi River in what was later named the Trail of Tears. Many Native Americans were forced from their ancestral homelands due to bribes to their tribal leaders, or even at gunpoint. In the difficult journey made by the Native Americans, many innocent men, women, and children died in search of a new homeland. The president of our nation practically declared war and unjustly forced people from their homelands. Is this job of our president to take force innocent people from their land for no reason other than their heritage? It is not fair to say that President Jackson had the authority to let such a violation of human rights occur. This country was founded on a basis of human rights, yet the President of the nation chose to blatantly disregard these ideals by sending free men from their homelands, or forcing them to blend into the culture, losing their culture and heritage. Jackson's personal dislike for Native Americans and his prejudice towards them lead to his creation of rash, and unfair decisions.
One tribe of Indians, the Cherokee, chose to blend into our culture, yet Jackson was very unhappy about their decision. Soon after when the land the Native American's had was discovered to contain gold, a new state measure was passed that put the Cherokee under the jurisdiction of the state. They lost their right to bear witness in court in any case involving whites. When the Cherokee finally won their rights back in the Supreme Court case of Worcester v. Georgia, Jackson was quoted saying, "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Jackson blatantly disregarded the court ruling that named the Cherokee people a domestic dependant nation and bribed a tribal leader that led his tribe to present-day Oklahoma. Andrew Jackson chose to blatantly disobey a ruling set by the Supreme Court, and acting rashly and dishonestly towards the Native Americans in a way that was unprecedented for. The disobeying of a Supreme Court ruling should have been grounds for immediate impeachment. How any one man, worse yet the president, could break such a large law that had such an open impact is in today's society unbelievable. Yet Jackson did this exact thing, he blatantly disobeyed the ruling set by the Supreme Court to accomplish his own personal vendetta against the Native Americans.
President Andrew Jackson also introduced a very corrupt system to what was at the time a fairly balanced governmental system. With the spoils system, Jackson claimed that to the victor of an election went the ability to fill offices with whomever he wished. The precedent for the time period was set by the presidents of the Virginia Dynasty who kept a somewhat balanced appeal between parties in the executive branch. Jackson chose to sometimes fire people from certain positions to introduce inexperienced individuals to the position. These inexperienced people were often close friends of Jackson that did not deserve the position they attained. Jackson once again took the power of the presidency to a new level, one that clearly stretched the limits of what our founding fathers had pre-ordained for our country. Instead of establishing diversity and equality throughout the branches of government, Jackson forcefully formulated a system that would keep him in control. Because of Jackson's actions, it is said that men feared for their jobs, their livelihood, and chose to strictly adhere to Jackson's agenda with less opposition. With less opposition and criticism, how was our country expected to grow to new and unforeseen boundaries? As was clearly evident in the case of Worcester v. Georgia, Jackson once again put his personal vendetta regarding the course of action to take ahead of the of the course of action that was previously established and successfully put into effect.
Yet another instance in Jackson's presidency where he seemed to abuse his power, and put his personal agenda before that of the country's, concerned the Bank of the U.S. In his younger years, Jackson was almost financially crippled due to banks, and forever more saw them as a threat to his very existence. Therefore, when the Bank attempted to pass the recharter bill, Jackson immediately vetoed it. Although the Bank of the U.S. still had four years left before its charter would expire, Andrew Jackson took immediate action to completely destroy the bank. He claimed that The Banks wanted to destroy him, but he would destroy it. In doing so, he removed Federal deposits from the Bank of the U.S. and put them in Pet Banks. Soon after when he saw the Pet Banks gaining power, he issued the Specie Circular which declared coins as the only government noted form of money. All bank notes rapidly lost value, and a sudden economic downshift occurred. Did President Andrew Jackson have the right to withdraw money from the Bank of the U.S. for his own selfish motives? Such severe actions that lead to the economic depression are directly caused by Jackson's creation of the Specie Circular and his desire to destroy all banks. In doing so, he also destroyed the livelihood of many investors that were helping the country's economy grow.
The Trail of Tears, Bank of the U.S., and the introduction of the spoils system are all clearly part of Jackson's personal agenda, not part of what should have been his goal to further the well-being of the United States of America and its peoples. Although some argue that Jackson was enhancing the power of the presidency, they sometimes fail to realize the balance that the Founders of the country had gone to so much trouble to create. The jurisdiction of the Judicial Branch was proven to be invalid, the Spoils System created corruption, and the destruction of the Bank of the U.S. created severe economic problems. The power of the presidency had clearly been taken advantage of solely for Jackson's personal beliefs, leading to serious issues within our governmental structure.

Comments
Comment 1 of 1
 
 
great!

Posted on 09/15/2007 at 11:09:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Comment 1 of 1
 
Advertisment