How Did Andrew Jackson Abuse Of Power

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.

In Jackson’s mind, he expected the Indians to thrive as they did in their current home, except there would be no white men. Three chiefs, each one from the Chippewa, Potawatomi, and Ottawa tribes, came forward to the White House and told about their suffering. They said they were promised land as fertile as Illinois, but received land that a snake couldn’t live on. They could not live in the prairie when they were from the woods. Thousands of Indian people suffered because Jackson heard what they said

Jackson’s reasons for vetoing were because Jackson felt a National Bank did not benefit the “common man” because Jackson saw a National Bank as unconstitutional since the “common man” did not profit economically (Doc D). An opposing political party saw Jackson’s excessive vetoing as Jackson creating a monarchy and found these vetoing actions as unconstitutional showing more opposition to “common man” philosophies (Doc E). To destroy the National Bank and further expand “common” man” power, Jackson distributed the Federal Fund into “pet banks” which were banks owned by Jackson’s “common man” friends. Finally, Jackson created the Indian Removal Act to support the “common man.” Through Indian Removal, more of the “common men” were able to obtain land and profit economically. Although Cherokees expressed their opposition to Indian removal because Indians wanted to remain on their land since Indians saw themselves as American Citizens too, Jackson continued to appeal to the “common man” by creating the Indian Removal act that allowed “common man” access and ownership to Indian land (Doc H, I). The Jackson administration focused on supporting the “common man.”

When Americans expanded their country west, they interfered with many American Indian Tribes. In a letter he wrote to congress, he explained “This emigration should be voluntary… (but) if they remain within the limits of the states they must be subject to their laws” (Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress December 7, 1829). Andrew Jackson offered to let the American Indians stay if they followed their laws. But in 1831, Jackson forced the Native Americans out of their homelands starting the Indian Removal. According to a reprinted in Niles Weekly Register, the Cherokee’s said “We wish to remain on the land of our fathers. We have a perfect and original right to remain without interruption or molestation”. Jackson lied to the American Indians about allowing them to stay. Jackson did not act democratically because he did not allow the American Indians to stay and forced them to move west. Jackson was fair to his supporters, but not 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

Although Jackson was a hard money supporter, he was sensitive to his many soft money supporters, and made it clear that he would object to renewing the charter of the Bank of the United States, which was due to expire in 1836. When Jackson could not legally abolish the Bank of the United States before the expiration of its charter, he weakened it by removing the government’s deposits from the bank. Jackson fired two of his secretary of treasury when they refused to carry out the order because they believed that such an action would destabilize the financial system. Jackson got Roger Taney to carry out his order. Taney took the deposits out of the Bank of the

Jackson’s removal policy did not sit well with a lot of groups; many were uncomfortable about it but agreed it had to be done. President Jackson showed great leadership apart from everything else, and handled the Indian Removal act when no one else wanted to address the growing issue of Indian problem. Most government officials saw little to gain from addressing this and would do nothing. Some historians believe the president’s motivation was clearly out of concern for the Indians customs, their culture and their language, but his first concern was the safety of the military, Indians occupying the east might jeopardize the defense of the United States.

When we look back into history, we are now able to fully comprehend the atrocities the Indians faced at the hands of the historic general and President, Andrew Jackson. It can be seen as one of the most shameful and unjust series of political actions taken by an American government. However, as an American living almost 200 years later, it is crucial to look at the motives possessed by Andrew Jackson, and ask whether he fully comprehended the repercussions of his actions or if is was simply ignorant to what he was subjection the natives to. We must also consider weather he truly had the countries best interest in mind, or his own.

Andrew Jackson has gone down as one of the best presidents in United States history and that’s because he did many great things to improve the United States. Throughout his presidency he constantly abused his power as the president and did many things that expanded the powers of the president. One of the biggest things that President Jackson did while in office was pass the Indian Removal Act. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was when Jackson forced all the Indians to move to the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase, while the Supreme Court declared this unconstitutional. Many of the Indians went peacefully, but many of the Indians also decided to protest and take it to the Supreme Court (Darrenkamp). While the court did side with the Indians Jackson and Congress forced the Indians to give up their land. The federal troops were called in to escort the Indians to their new land. Fifteen thousand Indians were forced to move and while on their way about a third of the Indians died, and this event became to be known as the Trail of Tears (Darrenkamp). Jackson had

By the time Jackson came to power, the nation had been drastically changed by the Industrial Revolution. The simple, pastoral, agricultural lifestyle was being replaced

During the 19th Century, The Trail of Tears was the greatest crime against the indigenous population, in which the Indian removal Act led to their destruction. President Andrew Jackson removed the Native Americans from their ancestral lands because he believed that they were uncivilized. Jackson had no remorse for the Native Americans, as he and the whites forced them out of their own land, as he abused his power of authority.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency made him one of the most controversial presidents that has ever existed in the history of the United States of America. Andrew Jackson for many was a cruel tyrant who reinstated the tax on British goods with Tariff of 1828 and rejected the renewal of the charter for the Second National Bank of the United States. Also, Andrew Jackson created the Indian Removal Act of 1830 which end result would be the Trail of Tears during the presidency of Martin Van Buren. Those who oppose Andrew Jackson being the champion of the common man cite that Andrew Jackson abused his executive power of enforcing the law and the presidential veto. Andrew Jackson was misguided with some of the actions he made during his presidency, but he committed those actions because he thought they would help the common U.S. citizen. President Andrew Jackson used his executive power to be a champion of the common man during his presidency from 1828 to

“Build a fire under them. When it gets hot enough, they’ll move”. There are many opposing opinions as to if Andrew Jackson abused his presidential power under the Indian Removal Act of 1830, and accordingly, each side can be justified. However, there is more solid evidence proving that Andrew Jackson did indeed misuse his duties as president by transforming the free movement of Indians to a forced one. Although many believed that Andrew Jackson demonstrated a genuine concern for the well being of the Native Americans, Jackson abused his power as president by unfairly enforcing the Indian Removal Act that did not authorize him to repeal treaties or force the relocation of Indians.

In 1830, congress passed The Indian Removal Act, which became a law 2 days later by President Andrew Jackson. The law was to reach a fairly, voluntarily, and peacefully agreement for the Indians to move. It didn’t permit the president to persuade them unwillingly to give up their land by using force. But, “President Jackson and his government

Action was necessary and accepted as rational by the American people because of their unsustainable racism and greed for land to expand their settlements. The intent was not to burden the Native Americans, but “Jackson fully expected the Indians to thrive in their new surroundings, educate their children, acquire the skills of white civilization so as to improve their living conditions, and become citizens of the United States”(Remini 213). In order to become citizens of the United States the Indians were expected to conform to the societal normalities of the white citizens. Jackson put the removal act in place to diffuse conflict and encourage Native Americans to accept the American way of life as their new culture. The idea was to act in the most humane manner that would help both sides, not necessarily to disregard the Indians heritage or way of life.