Nullification Crisis
Toward the end of his first term in office, Jackson was forced to confront the state of South Carolina on
the issue of the protective tariff. Business and farming interests in the state had hoped that Jackson
would use his presidential power to modify tariff laws they had long opposed. In their view, all the
benefits of protection were going to Northern manufacturers, and while the country as a whole grew
richer, South Carolina grew poorer, with its planters bearing the burden of higher prices.
The protective tariff passed by Congress and signed into law by Jackson in 1832 was milder than that of
1828, but it further embittered many in the state. In response, a number of South Carolina citizens
endorsed the states' rights principle of "nullification," which was enunciated by John C. Calhoun,
Jackson's vice president until 1832, in his South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828). South Carolina
dealt with the tariff by adopting the Ordinance of Nullification, which declared both the tariffs of 1828
and 1832 null and void within state borders. The legislature also passed laws to enforce the ordinance,
including authorization for raising a military force and appropriations for arms.
Nullification was only the most recent in a series of state challenges to the authority of the federal
government. There had been a continuing contest between the states and the national government
over the power of the latter, and over the loyalty of the citizenry, almost since the founding of the
republic. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, for example, had defied the Alien and Sedition
Acts, and in the Hartford Convention, New England voiced its opposition to President Madison and the
war against the British.
In response to South Carolina's threat, Jackson sent seven small naval vessels and a man-of-war to
Charleston in November 1832. On December 10, he issued a resounding proclamation against the
nullifiers. South Carolina, the president declared, stood on "the brink of insurrection and treason," and
he appealed to the people of the state to reassert their allegiance to that Union for which their
ancestors had fought.
When the question of tariff duties again came before Congress, it soon became clear that only one man,
Senator Henry Clay, the great advocate of protection (and a political rival of Jackson), could pilot a
compromise measure through Congress. Clay's tariff bill -- quickly passed in 1833 -- specified that all
duties in excess of 20 percent of the value of the goods imported were to be reduced by easy stages, so
that by 1842, the duties on all articles would reach the level of the moderate tariff of 1816.
Nullification leaders in South Carolina had expected the support of other Southern states, but without
exception, the rest of the South declared South Carolina's course unwise and unconstitutional.
Eventually, South Carolina rescinded its action. Both sides, nevertheless, claimed victory. Jackson had
committed the federal government to the principle of Union supremacy. But South Carolina, by its show
of resistance, had obtained many of the demands it sought, and had demonstrated that a single state
could force its will on Congress
War Against the Bank
Alexander Hamilton, the first secretary of the treasury, proposed that Congress charter a national bank
which would have branches around the country. Such a bank, he argued, could assist the federal
government by providing a safe place to deposit tax money and other revenue, allowing the government
to make payments throughout the country, and to market government bonds. Hamilton also believed
the bank could play a central role in the economy by printing banknotes which could serve as currency,
encouraging trade among the various regions of the nation, and making loans to fledgling industries. In
1791, in response to Hamilton's recommendation, Congress chartered the Bank of the United States,
later known as the First Bank of the United States.
Thomas Jefferson and members of his Democratic-Republican party opposed the Bank for numerous
reasons, including a suspicion that it was unconstitutional. The Democratic-Republicans were strict
constructionists, arguing that the federal government only had the powers specifically granted to it in
the Constitution. Since the Constitution did not specifically state that Congress can charter a bank, the
Democratic-Republicans considered the Bank unconstitutional. In 1811, when the Bank's charter was
about to expire, the Democratic-Republicans controlled both Congress and the presidency. They decided
to allow the Bank's charter to lapse, and the Bank went out of business.
The very next year, the nation became embroiled in the War of 1812. The U.S. government had a hard
time selling war bonds and paying military suppliers and soldiers in an orderly fashion. By the end of the
war, President James Madison had concluded that a national bank might not be such a bad thing after
all. At his urging, Congress in 1816 chartered another Bank of the United States, commonly called the
Second Bank of the United States. In the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the Supreme Court in 1819
affirmed the Bank's constitutionality; Congress, proclaimed the Court, did indeed have the authority to
charter a national bank, even though it was not explicitly given that power in the Constitution.
That same year, the country's economic troubles came to a head in the depression known as the Panic
of 1819. Economic historians mostly agree that the Second Bank did not play a major role in causing the
crisis, but many people at the time blamed the Bank. During the Panic, the Bank called in many loans to
protect its own stability, and the financial hardship it caused led to further resentment of the Bank.
Among those who bitterly hated the Bank was Andrew Jackson. He considered it the very embodiment
of elite privilege and power. And Jackson was by no means the Bank's only enemy. Those who opposed
the bank came from two groups--those favoring "soft money" and those favoring "hard money." The
"soft money" advocates disliked the Bank, because it informally regulated the state banks by tightly
controlling the money supply, which limited financial opportunity. People in the West, who needed
loans for new farms and businesses, particularly resented the Second Bank for this practice, as did
investors and other supporters of state banks.
"Hard money" advocates also criticized the Second Bank but for a different reason. They believed that
specie--gold and silver coins--was the only safe currency. They thought that no bank, regardless of how
well run it might be, should be able to issue bank notes. This was Jackson's position. He had once
speculated in a land deal with paper credit, and his business had been ruined. The experience left him
suspicious of all banks.
In 1823, as the economy rebounded from the Panic, Nicholas Biddle, an aristocratic Philadelphian,
became president of the Second Bank of the United States. He won wide recognition as an excellent and
responsible leader for what was, by far, the nation's most important financial institution. At first, Biddle
tried to stay out of politics. However, when he saw popular opposition to the Second Bank rising during
Jackson's first term as president of the United States, he decided to become active politically to defend
the Bank's interests. In particular, he formed an alliance with two powerful senators, Henry Clay and
Daniel Webster. Clay and Webster were nationalists who strongly supported the national bank and
believed the federal government should be very active in economic matters, even if the Constitution did
not specifically grant it that power.
With encouragement from Clay and Webster, Biddle applied for a renewal of the Bank's charter in 1832,
although the original charter was not going to expire until 1836. The three men believed the institution
enjoyed public support. Since Jackson was running for re-election as president, they reasoned, he might
not want to make the Bank an issue and thus would sign the renewal. On the other hand, if Jackson
chose to veto it, he would lose support in key states such as Pennsylvania, where the Bank had its
headquarters. That would benefit his opponent who happened to be Henry Clay.
Clay, Webster, and Biddle badly misjudged Jackson's reaction. When word got out that Congress was
considering re-chartering the Bank, Attorney General Roger B. Taney laid out the situation as he saw it:
"Now, as I understand the application at the present time, it means in plain English this--the Bank says
to the President, your next election is at hand--if you charter us, well--if not, beware of your power." To
Jackson, it sounded like a threat to his presidency and a challenge to his integrity. It was bad enough
that the Bank had so much economic influence in the country, but now Biddle was trying to manipulate
the presidency for the Bank's benefit. The Bank, said Jackson, was an "undemocratic, hydra monster"
that was out of control. As the people's president, Jackson believed he had the responsibility to destroy
it. After Congress passed a bill re-chartering the Bank, Jackson exercised his power as president and
vetoed it.
Indian Removal Act of 1830
The Indians in the South were constantly under pressure from white settlers. Only the federal
government had the ability to protect the Indians. President Jackson removed that federal protection.
In 1830, the federal government passed the "Indian Removal Act," which allocated funds to negotiate
with the Indians regarding their removal from the southern states. The state of Georgia attempted to
use the Indian Removal Act to uproot the Indians in their state. In Worcester v. Georgia, the Supreme
Court ruled that removal of Indians was illegal. Chief Justice John Marshall stated: "The several Indian
nations were distinct political communities having territorial boundaries within which their authority is
exclusive, and having rights to all land within those boundaries, which is not only acknowledged, but
guaranteed by the United States." Georgia ignored the decision.
In an act that was uncharacteristic of Jackson's belief in a strong central government, he ignored the
Supreme Court ruling, and made no attempt to stop Georgia's action. Jackson is reputed to have said:
"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it."
The federal government then began enforcing the Indian Removal Act by forcefully evicting 15,000
Indians from their land and compelling them, at gun point, to migrate to Oklahoma. The road to
Oklahoma was named the "Trail of Tears."
In 1838 and 1839, as part of Andrew Jackson's Indian removal policy, the Cherokee nation was forced to
give up its lands east of the Mississippi River and to migrate to an area in present-day Oklahoma. The
Cherokee people called this journey the "Trail of Tears," because of its devastating effects. The migrants
faced hunger, disease, and exhaustion on the forced march. Over 4,000 out of 15,000 of the Cherokees
died.
Democracy
1. Free and equal representation of people: the free and equal right of every person to participate in a
system of government, often practiced by electing representatives of the people by the majority of the
people
2. Democratic nation: a country with a government that has been elected freely and equally by all its
citizens
3. Democratic system of government: a system of government based on the principle of majority
decision-making
4. Control of organization by members: the control of an organization by its members, who have a free
and equal right to participate in decision-making processes
The Spoils System
Jackson's loyalty to his friends led him to expand what is known as the spoils system. This is the practice
of discharging members of the defeated political party from public office and replacing them with
members of the winning party. The system had been practiced previously in the federal governments
when Thomas Jefferson as president had removed Federalists for people in his own party. Jackson
pledged to sweep the “corrupt” opposition out of office.
In answer to criticism of Jackson's policy on political appointments, Senator William L. Marcy of New
York replied, “To the victor belong the spoils.” Although Jackson was charged with abusing the spoils
system, he in fact replaced less than 20 percent of current federal officeholders. The process of
rewarding political service with public office helped to establish major political parties. In an effort to
curb the excesses of the spoils system, Congress passed the Civil Service Act in 1883.