In 1 829, a new kind of President elected to office was Andrew Jackson a Democrat, indeed his promises in office were to uphold the Ignited States Constitution along with Political democracy being assured Jackson promised individual liberty and economic opportunity. Yet, Jackson’s contradicted themselves with everything they claimed to be. Jackson’s even believed they where flawless. In December of 1 829, George Henry Evans wrote “The Working Men’s Declaration of Independence”(Doc A). Under the portrayed image of Jackson at the expense of vested interest he rewrote the
Declaration of Independence to establish a meaning of individual liberty among the people, the average man, and to give a feeling of security against the ill-treatment of the government. This document established that the citizens had a say in what the government does and that they may reform the abuses Of such a government. To further enforce individual freedom, Jackson denies no free American. He follows the rule for equal opportunity, and allows any man to hold office by means of election rather than appointment. This was just a political pact to the people though.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
Jackson rotated federal beholders using the spoil system, though only nine percent were replaced it was the most important nine percent. During this era, the Jackson Democrats felt that there were equal economic opportunities for all Americans. Jackson felt that the Bank of the United States was mainly for the rich class and foreign countries rather than the country as a whole. He vetoed the national bank in favor of a sub-group of pet banks that would be friendlier to the classes of a lower standard (Doc B). Yet Before Jackson even vetoed the bank charter Daniel Webster already had a response ready for Jackson (Doc C).
Webster claimed Jackson’s veto of the charter was prejudice. He claimed the populace was being lied to and vetoing the charter was not democratic. Yet, Harriet Martinets, a British author in 1834, reported that she as an observer saw the intellectual ability of the citizens. She viewed every man in town an individual citizen and every man in the country a landowner. Martinets felt that her findings were an evident sign of prosperity when compared to British standards (Doc D). Another instance of democracy at its finest is Chief Justice Roger B. Tansy’s opinion in the Supreme Court Case of Charles River Bridge v.
Warren Bridge (Doc. H). This decision stated that while the Charter of 1 785 allowed the Charles River Bridge to be erected, it did not prohibit any other bridges from being constructed. Therefore, Tangy exclaimed the economy of the regions along the Charles River would benefit from the bridge. In Tansy’s action, he was eliminating the monopolies of the elite and creating equal economic opportunities for all citizens who need to use the bridge. This prevented a paying of a toll straight into the owner’s pocket. The owner of the bridge would visibly be part of the richer class.
Thus, a show Of democracy had been conceived. The Jackson’s felt that they had a political democracy. Although, as president, Andrew Jackson took total advantage of his power. King Andrew vetoed dozens of bills for one reason or another. He kicked men out of the government that had done him wrong although Adams agreed that some of these men deserved their fate. Although Jackson did not practice what he preached, he replaced the men that he relieved with men from the social and intellectual class. Although Jackson proclaimed about individual rights of the everyday citizen, his appointees were far from common men.
Jackson democrats where not always constructive, there were a few who took Jackson’s ideas outlandishly to produce a period in American history with some low points. This holds true for the period of 1820 – 1830. A number of low-class citizens misinterpreted democratic reforms as an opportunity to disregard decorum and law. Philip Hone, a Whig politician, wrote descriptions of riots, which erupted in Philadelphia and large Eastern cities. ” dreadful riots between the Irish and the Americans have again disturbed the peace (Doc. E). ” These riots produced nothing but pain for stoneware and people who had property or lives stolen from them.
Acts and Resolutions of South Carolina in 1835 (Doc. F). While the Jackson Democrats believed that the only way to reform society was through constitutional means, South Carolina did not abide by the same convictions, full heartedly denying freedom of speech by threatening to sift threw mail weeding out anti-slave posters who where causing the slaves by giving them hope. The soon-to-secede South Carolina decided not to collect taxes on imports and President Jackson decided they had crossed a boundary and threatened military action against South Carolina fifthly where not going to obey the federal government.
A tragic page in history of the Occasioning era where military force was used is told by Cherokee Indians (Doc G) On the Trail of Tears, thousands of lives were senselessly ended en route from Georgia to the western reservations. There can be no justification for the terrible mistreatment the Indians had to endure. The only argument that can be made is the outlook on Indians at the time. Indians where looked upon as nothing more then expendable organisms not part of any class system to be considered equal. While inexcusable it is possible to see how Jackson could have view this action as Democratic.
The Jackson Democrats doings and influence while in office caused sum controversy and political and social turmoil. The Democrat’s proclamation as “guardians of the United States Constitution, political democracy, individual liberty, and economic equality” is quite applicable. Indeed, the Jackson Democrats succeed in the ambitions, and their avid social reforms helped make the United States a more liberated and democratic nation. In 1824, there were four candidates for the President of the United States. At this time only one party existed, the Democratic-Republicans.
This would soon change. The parties were soon to separate into the Whig Party and Jackson-Democratic Party, or Democratic party. Northern industrialists and merchants supported the Wigs; and they were more in favor of federal government involvement in the national economy. The common people and machine politicians in the East supported the Democrats; and they believed in absolute political freedom. Some of the topics that contributed to the spilt into two parties were major political figures of that time period, the states’ rights debate, and economic issues, policies, and problems.
The factors that contributed the most to the emergence of a two party system were the major political figures of that time period. The political figures of that time period contributed the most because they influenced the people to split into two parties. In 1 828, Andrew Jackson beat John Q. Adams in the presidential election. This led to many anti- Jackson feelings and started the roots of a new political party, which would come to be known as the Wigs. Jackson believed the main decision making power in the country should lie in the hands of the national government.
Another political party was created under the leadership of Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, in 1832. They supported John Q. Adams and were anti- Jackson. Daniel Webster was the senator of Massachusetts and Henry Clay was Speaker of the House. John C. Calhoun as one of the leaders of the Democratic Party. He was vice-president under John Q. Adams. He believed that nullification Was the only means of protecting Southern rights. Robert Haynes was from South Carolina and he represented states’ rights. He was one of Calhoun protogs. He was a senator and he blasted the Tariff of Abomination.
Nullifiers and secessionists would later use his arguments. In the election of 1836, Martin Van Burden of the Democratic Party came to rower. He was one of the main creators of the Democratic Party, along with Jackson and Calhoun. He believed that Democracy was a form of government for everyone. Without these political figures starting the political parties there wouldn’t have been a reemergence of a two party system. With the growing population, economic issues, policies and problems were other factors that contributed to the reemergence of a two party system.
The Tariff of Abomination was one Of these issues. Congress increased the tariff from 23% on dutiable goods to 37%. New England pushed for passage of the Tariff of 1828. Southerners hated the tariff; they feared it would hurt the South. In 1833, Congress passed a Force Bill. It stated that the President in the future could use military force to collect federal tariffs if necessary. South Carolinians dubbed it the “Bloody Bill”. Henry Clay pushed to recharge the Bank of the united States in 1832. Jackson vetoed the charter and stated that the Bank was monopolistic and unconstitutional.
He also criticized Nicholas Fiddle, the head of the Bank of the U. S. Jackson aimed to weaken the Bank and Fiddle by transferring federal deposits from the Bank to 23 state “pet ankhs”. There was a Panic in 1837 caused by over-speculation. Land speculators in the West borrowed heavily from “wildcat banks. ” They were unable to pay back loans causing bank failures. This happened under Martin Van Burden’s presidency. These economic issues further separated groups into different political parties by splitting up the North and the South on economic issues.
The problems with tariffs, competition between banks, and over- speculation in land crated a climate of divergent opinions that contributed to the developments of a two-party system. The states’ rights debate also undistributed to the spilt of parties. The South Carolina Exposition was one of these debates. It was written by Calhoun and denounced the Tariff of Abominations as unjust and unconstitutional. It stated that states should nullify the tariff. No other states supported South Carolina in its protest. In 1829, a New England senator introduced bill to curb sale of public lands.
Western senators furiously defended their interests and Southern senators sided with the West. Northern senators disagreed and the stage was set for a showdown in the Senate. This was called the Webster-Haynes debate. In 1832, Jackson attempted to improve the tariff to conciliate the south by lowering the Tariff of 1828. South Carolina nullified the Tariff and threatened to secede from the Union if Jackson attempted collection by force. Other states did not side with South Carolina; this standoff threatened a possible civil war.
These debates contributed by breaking states up in groups, which would cause them to have different political parties. These events where great examples of how the re-emergence of two-parties Was inevitable. These factors contributed greatly to the reemergence of a two party system. Without these actors there probably would have not been a spilt. Though the political figures contributed most, the economic issues and the states’ rights debate still contributed a great deal to the spilt. The Wigs eventually came to be known as the Republican Party that we have today.
And the Jackson- Democrats of course came to be known as the Democratic Party that we have today. In fact, many of Utopias were found in the western regions of the developed states. However, western migration also slowed down the development of democracy by the forceful and unfair removal of the Indians out of their homeland. The government promised the Indians that they would not be removed from their land. However, when Georgia began to move the Cherokee nation west, the Cherokees went to the Supreme Court. The Cherokees won their court case; The Cherokee Nation v. He State of Georgia, but Jackson violated the court order and forced the Cherokees to move to Oklahoma. The Seminole War stalled democracy because the government broke the contract. Hence, westward migration helped democracy by providing economic opportunity and individualism but failed to provide democracy to Indians because they were illegally moved out of their nameless. Jackson democrats were without flaw. And it would be preposterous to conceive a period in American history without its low points. This holds true for the period of 1820 – 1 830 as well.
A number of middle class citizens misinterpreted democratic reforms as an opportunity to disregard decorum and law. Philip Hone, a Whig politician, wrote descriptions of riots which erupted in Philadelphia and large Eastern cities (Doc. E). Middle class citizens who took advantage of individual rights caused chaos and destruction. Yet, an understanding of human nature is necessary to continue. It must be expected that some people are unable to handle the privileges of individualism, and a crowded city is the most likely place for a riot to break out.
Such is the situation even presently. Especially in large cities, violence and rioting is not uncommon. A political party aimed at better the nation can not be justly held responsible for the terrible behavior of a few. The same principle holds true for the Acts and Resolutions of South Carolina in 1 835 (Doc. F). While the Jackson Democrats believed that the only way to reform society was through constitutional means, South Carolina did not abide by he same convictions. Instead, they used individual liberty to over-rule the government.
The South Carolina legislature decided to nullify the Post Office Department (which violated the first amendment to the Constitution) and outlaw abolition movements (thereby denying freedom of speech). Finally, the soon-to-secede South Carolina decided not to collect taxes on imports and President Jackson decided they had gone too far. He threatened them with war in order to restore rational behavior. Although is possible to show all the positive and constructive reforms initiated by the Jackson Democrats, it s impossible to ignore the tragic oppression of the Native Americans by President Jackson.
On the Trail of Tears, thousands of lives were senselessly ended en route from Georgia to the western reservations. There can be no justification for the terrible mistreatment the Indians had to endure. However, it is necessary to look at the situation for that time period. While all white men were now considered equal and the middle class was elevated, the Blacks and Native Americans were not included. Even Thomas Jefferson did not intend to include either race when drafting the Declaration of Independence. So, while it can not be excused, it becomes possible to comprehend how such a travesty might occur.