The Defense of Andrew Jackson's Impeachment

672 Words3 Pages
The Defense of Andrew Jackson’s Impeachment During Andrew Jackson’s presidency, Jackson put forth some of his own ideas which became very controversial. He dealt with being accused of attacking the National Bank, the nullification crisis in South Carolina, and the removal of Native Americans. In Jackson’s defense, his actions were never unconstitutional, and he was only trying to help his people. The Bank of the United States was an organization that Jackson greatly disapproved of. He believed the bank helped lead to the Panic of 1819, and signified Eastern power and prosperity. He felt the bank was used only by the wealthy, who cared not for the common people. The bank’s financial authority threatened democracy. Jackson sensed that it might try to take control of the government. Jackson did have evidence; all federal tax revenues were deposited in the National Bank instead of private banks, so the wealthy earned the extra interest. Also, loans were extended for congressmen at lower rates of interest compared to the average citizen. Jackson ordered his second treasurer to transfer all government deposits into Democratic banks. As a result, The National Bank soon fell apart and New York became the new financial capital. Jackson’s strong policies disturbed many people in his own party; they nicknamed him “King Andrew”. These debatable policies resulted in the loss of many supporters, although his actions were completely constitutional. To protect America, the exports of British goods to the U.S. were reduced, which resulted in the British buying less cotton. As a result, the south was forced to buy more expensive northern goods. The south felt that the north was getting richer at their expense. A nullification theory questioned the authority of applying some federal laws in sovereign states. In 1832, a tariff law was passed that South Carolina saw as intolerable,

More about The Defense of Andrew Jackson's Impeachment

Open Document