Is Andrew Jackson a hero or villain? Andrew Jackson a man of many names, but also a man of many crimes. Andrew Jackson is a hero to most but to some like the Natives he is a villain. Jackson is a villain because he was the soul inspiration of the Trail of Tears, National Bank changes and he started the Indian Removal act The Indian Removal act started in 1830 when Jackson made it so he could grant the unsettled lands west of the mississippi river. Which he then exchanged for the indian land which was in state borders. This affected the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek and Seminole. Some went peacefully but many resisted. This lead to the Trail of Tears which was a big moment in history.
The Trail of tears began in 1831 as a part of Jackson’s
…show more content…
The time limitation made many Congress have concerns about the concentration of the financial power in a private corp. At around 1828, the bank was run by Nicholas Biddle. In January 1832, Biddle's supporters in Congress, introduced Bank recharter legislation. Even though the charter was not due to expire for four more years, they felt that the current Congress would recharter the Bank. They felt that Jackson would not risk losing votes in Pennsylvania and other commercial states by vetoing it. But at the time Jackson's position on the Bank was not antagonistic. He was concerned about the Bank's constitutionality and the general stability of paper money in place of gold and silver. But soon after that happened Jackson started to dislike the bank even more. He started by doing strong attacks against the Bank in the press. Then Jackson vetoed the Bank Recharter Bill. Jackson also ordered the federal government's deposits removed from the Bank of the United States and placed in state or "Pet" banks. The people agreed with Jackson and he was elected into another term. Biddle then retaliated by making it more difficult for businesses and others to get the money they needed. This caused economic problems at the end of 1833 and into
As the result, Andrew Jackson vetoed the Recharter Bill. He believed the bank held too much power, both politically and economically. Jackson also felt it was unconstitutional. He said that the bank was an exclusive
To take away the bank's credibility that Nicholas Biddle worked so hard establish, Jackson withdrew all of the government’s deposits causing repercussions throughout the nation's economy. The issue over the national bank alone was enough to fuel another political party itself. Many were displeased by Jackson’s veto, however, Henry Clay sided with Andrew Jackson over the issue. “I believed a bank of the United States not necessary, and that a safe reliance might be placed on the local banks, in the administration of the fiscal affairs of the Government.” - Henry Clay.
Knowing this, Clay thought to renew the Bank’s charter early in 1832 instead of 1836. He did this because he knew that Jackson was going to run for reelection in 1832 and he thought for sure that Jackson would never vote down a bill that would help the country dramatically if he was trying to win over the people of the United States. Jackson detested the bank so much that he vetoed the bill for an early renewal of the bills charter, “but renewal was still possible when the charter expired in 1836; to prevent that from happening, he set out to reduce the bank’s economic power”(Foner, Garraty). To diminish the banks power Jackson made an executive decision that he had
By the end of 1831, Clay and Webster encouraged the President of the Bank, Nicholas Biddle, to write out a petition for the renewal of the Bank. They believed that if Jackson tried to even veto this, this would become a big issue in the 1832
He comprehends the Constitution as a formal document that clearly asserts that all the power that resides in the Executive branch is entirely in the president’s control. This direct quote by Jackson exemplifies his stance on the ideology of power and can foreshadow the upcoming occurrences like issues with the National Bank, which critics have reprimanded him continuously for. While Jackson voiced his opinion frequently, he also expressed his hatred and contempt for the National Bank. The National Bank was originally set up by Washington in his presidency and granted the bank a charter for twenty years, which meant who ever was in power at that time could regrant the bank or discard of, if it was not successful.
The air is heavy with the smell of gunpowder. All across the horizon is littered with bodies. The cries of children can be heard, piercing through the fog. All the carnage, this sadness carried through the breeze. This could all be stopped with one thing.
Therefore, he was against the bank of the United States (BUS). Jackson wanted to give the states the power to control the bank. In turn, those banks would give out loans to people, not knowing that they couldn't pay them back. Jackson believed that the government had too much power. He wanted to limit the government from making decisions for the people.
Point of view or perspective could differ when it comes to describing an event or a person. If we take the case of Andrew Jackson the 7th US president who is often referred to as the “people’s president” there are mixed opinions. I believe he was a president for only some of the people as lots Creeks lost their lives and land for him to succeed. So in a land where the constitution says “all men are created equal,” the Creek Indians must not have been viewed as men such if Mr. Jackson was a man for the people.
A man that was cruel to the Cherokees, and made them move West. This man that did that was Andrew Jackson. A villain. Not a hero. Why would he do such a thing like what he did?
The Indian Removal Act was signed in 1830 by President Andrew Jackson to remove the Cherokee Indians from their homes and force them to settle west of the Mississippi River. The act was passed in hopes to gain agrarian land that would replenish the cotton industry which had plummeted after the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson believed that effectively forcing the Cherokees to become more civilized and to christianize them would be beneficial to them. Therefore, he thought the journey westward was necessary. In late 1838, the Cherokees were removed from their homes and forced into a brutal journey westward in the bitter cold.
He also got the some federal troops to take them from their homeland so they could have the land. Lastly, He got the western part of america and he had someone take them out of georgia and move them to oklahoma and many indians died. Andrew Jackson got the federal government to sign the indian removal act in 1830. The indian removal act
1) Describe the early European and Native American contacts and explain what impact treaties and warfare played in their interactions. What was the Indian Removal Act, the Allotment Act and the Reorganization Act and what their goals and impacts were’? (p.?) The experience of the Native American and the Europeans has been conflicting has at the beginning of the discovery of the new world with Christopher Columbus the on slaughter of the first Native people.
In this attack, he moved about 20% of United States’ money into private banks. These banks were known as ‘’pet’’ banks because they politically supported Andrew Jackson. This causes what we know as The Bank War. Andrew Jackson enlarged credit by doing away with the bank. Andrew Jackson then moved the money from those banks into the private ones that only supported him.
Andrew Jackson was President of the United States from 1829 until 1837. He is best known for his policy on the Trail of Tears and United States’ Bank. He is a president fraught with misconceptions and misinformation, however he accomplished good things during his presidency, despite popular misconception. Jackson was his own version of aristocracy. Those in Tennessee and South Carolina had a looser definition of aristocracy than those from New England and the North.
With these issues arising, the public became more aware of the fact that the Bank held too much power that even its advocates were unable to deny (Schlesinger 75). Jackson gave a message to Congress in 1829 that implored the legislature to recognize the unconstitutionality of the present Bank and to set reform for the Bank into motion if Congress agreed that the Bank was necessary (Remini 61). Jackson’s presentation made the president’s position clear and put the declaration of the unconstitutionality of the bank into public records. Had Biddle honestly investigated these allegations against the Bank, people would be certain of the Bank’s good intentions instead of viewing the Bank as power-hungry and unjust. Because Biddle stubbornly refused this compromise of investigation, the public became weary of the Bank’s power which Jackson would use to veto the recharter of the Bank and still maintain public