Andrew Jackson!

Andrew Jackson, as chief executive, was an absolute autocrat. He was the first president to simply ignore a ruling of the Supreme Court (in the matter of the removal of Indian tribes to west of the Mississippi) and I'm not sure that anyone has had the temerity to do that since. His comment that "they have made their ruling, now let them enforce it" shows an arrogance that goes totally against the principles of the US Constitution. He saw the office of the Presidency not as one of executor of the laws but, rather, as a position of power approaching royal prerogative. In fact, in his own time some cartoonists pictured him as a sceptered king and political editorialists referred to him as King Andrew the First. Not a very pleasant person, all in all.

Of course, Jackson wasn't the first to be accused of "royal" behavior in the office. Washington and John Adams were both accused by the Democrats of setting themselves up as monarchs. Jefferson as a cabinet member and while out of office thought the Constitution as a usurpation of the People's powers. When Jefferson became President he prosecuted critics of his administration under the Alien & Seditions Act, just like Adams. At the time Jefferson's purchase of Louisiana was shocking because he spent money that Congress had not agreed to budget. Madison and Monroe also expressed to the full the powers granted under the Constitution.

Jackson was very imperialistic in his vision of what American would become. He foresaw a truly continental nation stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific. He was advised as a young man by his Mother to decide for himself what was right, avoid the courts and settle disputes with honor. Jackson was a serious duelist, and not above executing soldiers who he thought needed it. His administration was hugely popular, but largely ineffective. Jackson and the Wizard of Kinderhook were the first to run a political campaign along modern lines. Jackson may well have been second only to Washington in capturing the public adoration.

Jackson, a recent widower who fought duels over Sarah's honor, became fixated on protecting the wife of one of his ministers, and that kept the administration in turmoil and diverted attention from more serious matters. His "ethnic cleansing" of the Civilized Tribes wasn't regarded as wrong at the time, but it remains a terrible stain on his administration. Even more popular, but destructive, was his war against the Bank of the United States. People of the time had a real fear of banks and Jackson, a plantation owner with slaves, hated them as well. The result was a victory for Jackson, but a depression for the nation in Little Van's administration.

Jackson was a hard headed, largely ignorant success in what was the frontier of the times. He was used to giving orders and having them obeyed, and never shrank from enforcing his ideas with blood. He was a man of his times, and those times were certainly raw compared with late 19th century and later. For all of Jackson's faults, and they were many, he was also largely responsible for how the U.S. spread its dominion across the continent in less than one hundred years. Now for some people that forever condemns the U.S., but a United States that did not become a continental power is almost unthinkable today.

All good points, Asherman, particularly as regards Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase. Today children in school are taught what a great deal the Purchase was. Nobody bothers to mention that it was a completely illegal transaction. Jefferson spent money which had never been budgeted by Congress for that purpose.

It may be important to remember that Jackson was largely a self-made man. Unlike every one of his predecessors, he did not inherit that pkantation with all the slaves, nor a lucrative law practice nor a business venture of any kind. He was the first American president not to come from the upper land-owning classes. It was one of the sources of his popularity and the begining of the "log cabin" tradition in politics.

I need to correct myself. Jackson's wife was named Rachel, not Sarah. She is reputed to have been one of the nicest people in Tennessee, and was truly Jackson's better half.

Though Jackson has a reputation for being merciless toward the Indian tribes, he and Rachel adopted an orphan Indian boy and raised him as part of their family. I rather imagine that Jackson wasn't so much a racist as he was determined that the frontiers should be continually expanded by citizens of the United States. His great hatred was reserved for the British from his experiences with them during the Revolutionary War.

Jackson was a great supporter of Western adventurers. Burr had Jackson's interest and tentative support for his adventures in a contested region of what was then the southwestern frontier. Jackson supported Huston and others involved in Texas Independance, and hoped to see Texas enter the Union. The New England states were afraid that as a State, Texas would shift political power in favor of the Plantation System and extend slavery. Jackson's son was a spendthrift and virtually ruined the family's finances with one failed enterprise after another.

Jackson's popularity land political strength remained strong throughout the Van Buren, Harrison, Tyler and Polk administrations. The Wizard took the hit for Jackson's economic failures, and Tyler was essentially a supporter of Jackson's domestic and foreign policies. It was Polk, probably the hardest working of all Presidents, who finally realized Jackson's vision of adding Texas to the United States. Polk was called "Young Hickory".

Why are you guys doing Gregrose's homework?

If he does no more that copy or rephrase what we've said here, he won't fair very well. On the other hand, perhaps we've piqued his curiosity enough that he will actually open a history book or biography on our seventh President.

LOL! This isn't my homework. I love how everyone on here assumes that the teenagers on Able2Know are just lazy brats who don't do their homework. Ever thought we might be intellectually curious about stuff, too?

Jeez louise!

Gee, why would I think a student might look for quick and easy homework answers around this place ?

Gregrose, I'm sure you're soaking in the information presented by the elders and you're in the process of putting together your own opinion to post. You have a couple of excellent historians at the ready to discuss this topic in great depth. Enjoy!

Green Witch,

I can't help but think you're being more than sarcastic and your last post was a challenge to see if I had any ideas of my own, which I most certainly do.

I think Jackson is full of contradictions and is hard to analyze as a whole. Some of the decisions he made seemed to be in what he believed was the best interest of the country (shortening the term of public office and changing the system of elections), while others (such as ethnic cleansing and 'reforming' the national bank) were influenced by his hard-head and stubborness.