Essay on Andrew Jackson and the Bank War

In his veto message, Jackson wrote, "It is to be regretted that rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes." This was true, since the bank was used to provide for the interests of the rich and not the common men such as the small farmers and urban workers.

Another reason why Andrew Jackson’s presidency was different was because of his attack on the Bank of the United States. In 1832, Andrew Jackson vetoed the bill to recharter the bank. Jackson believed the bank had an unfair advantage over the other banks. The national bank would get all the federal tax revenues instead of the state or private banks. Also the bank’s president, Nicholas Biddle would extend loans to the men in the congress at lower rates of interest than he would do to regular people. Because Jackson thought the bank was unjust he took away its federal charter and the bank became a state bank. Jackson appointed a secretary of treasury after his reelection in 1832. The secretary of treasury placed all government funds in certain state banks, otherwise known as the pet banks. The national bank became the Philadelphia bank for a while until it went out of business.

Jackson firmly believed in quality of economic opportunity, which he showed several times throughout his presidency. He believed the national bank helped the wealthy elite and that state banks would help the common man more. Also by

Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of the United States. His presidential term was from March 4, 1829 to March 4, 1837. Jackson was not about banks. Jackson hated the idea of the Second Bank charter renewal. One of Jackson’s famous quotes was; “The Bank… is trying to kill me, but I will kill it.” Jackson’s opinion of the Bank of the United States was that it was dangerous to the liberty of the people. Jackson’s opposition to banks became like an obsession. In 1832, Jackson vetoed the bill calling for an early renewal of the Second Bank’s charter even though the renewal was still possible when the charter expired in 1836. In order to prevent that from happening, Jackson set out to reduce the Bank’s economic power. Jackson acted against the advice of many congressional committees and several cabinet members. On October 1, 1833, Jackson announced that federal funds would no longer be deposited in the Bank of the United States. Jackson began placing the

President Jackson acted undemocratically because of his actions against the national bank. On July 10th, 1832, Jackson sent a bank veto message to congress. The message was sent to remove the US National Bank because it was only helpful for a wealthier class for things like investments. Citizens from wealthier classes were outraged by Jackson’s actions. Former senator Daniel Webster replied to Jackson message saying, “It manifestly seeks to

The Bank of the United States was technically the second bank of the U.S. since the first bank’s charter ended in 1811. The second bank held a monopoly over federal deposits, provided credit to growing enterprises, issued banknotes that served as a dependable medium of exchange, and used a restraining effect on the less well-managed state banks. Jackson didn’t trust the bank and thought it had too much power, so Jackson sought out to destroy it. There were two different groups when it came to opposition, “soft-money” and “hard-money”. Soft money supporters were progressive, they believed in economic growth and bank speculation. They supported the use of paper money and were mainly made up of bankers and allies to bankers. Hard money supporters were against expansion and bank speculation. They supported coinage only and rejected all banks that used paper money, which included the federal bank. Jackson was a hard money supporter although, he felt sympathy to the soft money supporters. Jackson could not legally end the bank before its charter expired. By removing the

In addition to creating a more democratic country, Jackson also tried to establish equal economic opportunity for the people of America. The best example of this is the vetoing of the charter of the Bank of the United States. The bank was a huge monopoly. It was ran by aristocrats, most of which were from England. Nicholas Biddle, who was the president of the bank, often used funds from the bank to lend money to the members of Congress, thus wining their support.

Jackson escalated this so-called "Bank War" in 1833 when he removed federal government funds that were on deposit with the BUS and distributed them to loyal state banks. That’s not right of him to do that, in my opinion it doesn’t matter if he’s president or not. It posed as a threat to him and he feared for his own power. Jackson did not even like paper money anyways. He preferred to use coins instead, so putting him on money he wouldn’t even approve of us using is idiotic.

The bank provided credit to growing enterprises, issued bank notes which served as a dependable medium of exchange throughout the country, and it exercised a restraining effect on the less well manages state banks. Nicholas Biddle, who ran the Bank, tried to put the institution on a sound and prosperous basis. But Andrew Jackson was always determined to destroy it (Brinkley, 249). The Bank had two opposition groups: the “soft-money” faction and the “hard-money” faction. Soft money advocates objected to the Bank of the United States because it restrained the state banks from issuing notes freely. Hard money advocates believed that coin was the only safe currency, and they condemned all banks that issued bank notes.

The Bank of the United States was designed to make money and build an economy. It was designed by men like Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris, but did not benefit the common citizen as much as wealthy investors. Why did a fledgling government need to borrow millions from overseas in order to invest in a “national” bank, to turn around and then borrow the same money back and pay interest on it? The banking system developed by Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris was prime pickings for speculators, and laid the groundwork for a history of unscrupulous activity regarding our nation’s money supply that continues to this day. The signatures on the Constitution were barely dry before corruption and

During the Jacksonian period of 1824-1848, America had great economic development that played a role in making this period known as the “common man,” live up to its expectations. The Bank War was one of Andrew Jackson's many attempts to lower the power of the federal government. The Bank of the United States was ran by Nicholas Biddle, and issued federal deposits, credit and bank notes. However, the main issue was that it restrained the power of state banks. The soft-money and hard-money were two groups, that opposed the Bank. The

With the Jackson administration into office, the Second Bank of the United States became threatened. President Jackson had a private prejudice that wasn’t party policy (Schlesinger 74). He hated banks, all banks, but he especially hated the Second Bank of the United States. He viewed all bankers as “little more than parasites who preyed upon the poor and honest working people of America” (Roughshod 2). The reason for his hatred most likely stemmed from his near ruin as a businessman (land speculator, merchant, and slaver trader) when in the 1790s he accepted some bank notes that turned out to be worthless. From then on, he never trusted anything but hard money, or specie (Roughshod 2).

Jackson resented banks because he was a man who came from a family of poor farmers who paid with goods and crops. He saw banks as only useful to the wealthy, so when Henry Clay proposed “The Bank Bill”, which was in favor of the recharter, Jackson vetoed it. Andrew Jackson only thought about himself, and people who were like him, poor farmers. In total, vetoed twelve bills during his presidency, which was more than all of the preceding presidents combined. Again, Jackson set his mind to do something, and it was done.

Hamilton’s creation of the first bank in the United States continues to exist in today’s economic environment. However, at that time Hamilton’s proposal was met with widespread resistance from individuals such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson who considered the creation of a federal bank as unconstitutional. The analysis made by Gordon in his book is consistent with arguments made by to have a bank that would be effective in order to implement the powers authorized by the government as it was implied in the constitution

While there are many notable differences between Jefferson and Jackson, there is one major similarity: their opinions relating to economics. They both firmly opposed a United States Bank that stood in opposition of state banks. Jackson was in favor of state banks and had won a bank war that enabled him to draw out money from the federal standpoint and place these funds into state banks. Jefferson had the same view, as he encouraged state banks. In other words, both Jackson and Jefferson opposed a national bank, and encouraged state banks.