Early American History Case File 502-01

Trials, Tails, and Tribulations: The Jackson Administration

Mission: How did the Jackson administration increase the power of the presidency?

Objectives: Identify the main events that took place during the Jackson administration.
Demonstrate how the rise of the politics of the common man played out in real time.
Analyze primary documents from the 1830s to explain Jackson’s presidency.

Lecture Outline:

Presidential Power
 Both a frontiersman and an upper class elite—a people’s man
 Frugal Jeffersonian
 Advised by the “kitchen cabinet”
 Support for Peggy Eaton and the common woman

Indian Removal Act

 Forces resettlement of thousands of Native Americans
 State laws forcing migration
 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia
 Worcester v. Georgia
 Forced Indian relocation along the trail of tears in late-1830s

Nullification Crisis
 South Carolina declares the Tariff of 1828 unconstitutional
 “Union” debated at federal level
 Force bill allows Jackson to use military force on South Carolina

Bank Wars
 Believed national bank was corrupt and unconstitutional
 1832: Henry Clay pushes bank bill
 EAH Case File 502-02
Indian Removal Act of 1830

Station #  Analysis Question(s)  Notes & Answers 

Using this map and your knowledge of

US history and geography, what do
you think the journey was like for
Station #1: Native Americans? Use specific
Map  evidence from the maps to support
your claims. 

Provide three specific reasons

Station # 2:  referenced in his speech that explain
Jackson’s why President Jackson supported
Message to Indian Removal.  
Congress 

According to the Supreme Court, why

Station #3: is the Indian Removal Act
Supreme unconstitutional? 
Court Cases  
 Station #4: Do you think Emerson thinks that
Arguments Indian Removal is just or unjust? Cite
against evidence from the document to
Native support your claim. 
American
Resettlement 

Based on the painting, how would you

Station #5: describe the Cherokee Nation’s
Cherokee journey along the Trail of Tears? What
Nation  stands out to you?

Station # 6: What are two reasons why Cave

Cave Johnson Johnson (US Congressman from
to President Tennessee and Postmaster General)
Jackson  supports the Indian Removal Act?
 What are two reasons why the
Station #7: Cherokee were fearful of moving to
Cherokee the new lands? Provide evidence from
Nation   the document to support your claims.
 EAH Case File 502-03
The Nullification Crisis

Tariff of Abominations passed by Congress and signed into law by President John Quincy
May Adams. This protective tariff had the highest rates of any tariff in U.S. history.

Andrew Jackson elected President with John C. Calhoun as his running mate. Jackson’s
supporters in the North supported protective tariffs but his Southern supporters opposed
1828

November
them.

Calhoun anonymously authors the South Carolina Exposition [and Protest], proposing
December nullification as a means to resist the Tariff of 1828. His authorship was an open secret.

Hayne-Webster Debate in the U.S. Senate over nullification and whether the Constitution
January 19-27 is a compact between the states or a national union of the American people.
1830

Jackson and Calhoun exchange toasts at a dinner celebrating Thomas Jefferson’s Birthday.
April 13
William Lloyd Garrison publishes the first issue of The Liberator, an abolitionist
newspaper, adding another element to an already tense situation between the North and
January 1
the South.
1831

Calhoun publishes the Fort Hill Address, entering publicly into the debate over
July 26 nullification for the first time.

Congress passes the Tariff of 1832, which lowered protective rates – but not enough to
July 14 appease the Nullifiers.

Andrew Jackson wins re-election with Martin Van Buren as his running mate.
November
South Carolina convenes a convention, which approves an Ordinance of Nullification.
November 24
1832

Jackson issues his Proclamation Regarding Nullification, clearly stating his opposition to
December 10 nullification.

John C. Calhoun, already a lame duck, resigns the Vice Presidency to represent South
December 28 Carolina in the U.S. Senate.

Congress passes the Force Bill,
authorizing Jackson to use military
March 2
force to collect the tariff.
1833
Congress simultaneously passes the Compromise
Tariff of 1833, which gradually lowered
protective rates over the following decade.

The South Carolina convention re-convenes to accept the Compromise Tariff (and nullify
March 11 the Force Bill).
 EAH Case File 502-04
Jackson’s Veto Message

Andrew Jackson presented his view of the US system of government when he vetoed the rechartered of the Bank
of the United States. The following is an excerpt from his veto message of 1832.

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.
Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth
cannot be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of heaven and the fruits of superior
industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law.

But when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, and
exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society, the
farmers, the mechanics, and the laborers—who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to
themselves, have aright to complain of the injustices of their government.

There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal
protection, and, as heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it
would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from
these just principles.

Why did President Jackson oppose the recharter of the Bank of the United States?

Andrew Jackson and his supporters have been criticized for upholding the principles of majority rule and the
supremacy of the federal government inconsistently and unfairly. Is this true? Consider the issue of the recharter
of the Bank, but also the nullification controversy and the removal of Native Americans.
 EAH Case File 502-05
The Second Party System

Democrats Whigs
Andrew Jackson Henry Clay
John C. Calhoun Daniel Webster
Leaders Martin Van Buren John Quincy Adams
Thomas Hart Benton William Henry Harrison

Political Democratic-Republicans (Jefferson, Madison) Federalists (Hamilton, John Adams

Tradition
State and local autonomy National power
Opposition to monopoly and privilege Support for a U.S. Bank, high tariffs
Major Political
Low land prices and tariffs Internal improvements
Beliefs
Freedom from government interference Broad government role in reforming America

Primary Sources of Support

South and West New England, Middle Atlantic, Upper Midwest
Region
Middle-class and small farmers, northeastern Big southern planters and wealthy
urban laborers and artisans businessmen, pockets of middling farmers in
Class
Midwest and South, artisans

Scots-Irish, Irish, German, French, and England, New England old stock
Ethnicity Canadian immigrants

Catholics, frontier Baptists and Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Quakers,

Religion free thinkers moralists, reformers

How can we see the developments of sectionalism in the second party system?

Station 1: Map of the Trail of Tears

 Station 2: Andrew Jackson’s Message to Congress (1830) - December 6th 1830

It gives me pleasure to announce to Congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily
pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is
approaching to a happy conclusion….The consequences of a speedy removal will be important to the
United States, to individual States, and to the Indian themselves… It will place a dense and civilized
population in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters….By opening the whole
territory between Tennessee on the north and Louisiana on the south to the settlement of the whites it
will incalculably [strengthen] strengthen the southwestern frontier... It will relieve the whole State of
Mississippi and the western part of Alabama of Indian occupancy, and enable those States to advance
rapidly in population, wealth, and power.  It will separate the Indians from immediate contact with
settlements of whites; free them from the power of the States; enable them to pursue happiness in their
own way and under their own rude institutions; will retard the progress of decay, which is lessening their
numbers, and perhaps cause them gradually, under the protection of the Government and through the
influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and
Christian community...What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few
thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms
embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than
12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization, and religion?....To save
him from this alternative, or perhaps utter annihilation, the General Government kindly offers him a new
home, and proposes to pay the whole expense of his removal and settlement. 
 Station 3: Supreme Court Cases

Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) Ruling: 

A question of much more difficulty remains. Do the Cherokees constitute a foreign state in the sense of the
constitution?... They are not a state of the Union ...not owing allegiance to the United States...The condition of
the Indians in relation to the United States is, perhaps, unlike that of any other two people in existence... They
acknowledge themselves, in their treaties, to be under the protection of the United States; they admit, that the
United States shall have the sole and exclusive right of regulating the trade with them, and managing all their
affairs as they think proper; and the Cherokees in particular... their relation to the United States resembles that
of a ward (child) to his guardian. They look to our government for protection: rely upon its kindness and its
power; appeal to it for relief to their wants; and address the president as their great father. They and their
country are considered by foreign nations, as well as by ourselves, as being so completely under the sovereignty
and dominion of the United States….as such, we don’t have jurisdiction… 

Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Ruling: 

….manifestly consider the several Indian nations as distinct political communities, having territorial boundaries,
within which their authority is exclusive, and having a right to all the lands within those boundaries, which is not
only acknowledged, but guaranteed by the United States.  The Cherokee Nation, then, is a distinct community,
occupying its own territory, with boundaries accurately described, in which the laws of Georgia can have no
force, and which the citizens of Georgia have no right to enter but with the permission of the Cherokees
themselves or in conformity with treaties and with the acts of Congress…as such, this means that the Indian
Removal act is unconstitutional… 
 Station 4: Arguments against Native American Resettlement, by Ralph Waldo Emerson

A PROTEST AGAINST THE REMOVAL OF THE CHEROKEE INDIANS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA LETTER TO
MARTIN VAN BUREN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES April 23, 1838.

SIR : Sir, my communication respects the sinister rumors that fill this part of the country concerning the
Cherokee people. The interest always felt in the Native population - an interest…. has been heightened in
regard to this tribe. Even in our distant State some good rumor of the Cherokee worth and civility has
arrived….we have witnessed with sympathy the painful labors of these Native Americans have worked to
redeem their race from the doom of eternal inferiority….they have worked hard to become more civil and
adopt the customs of the Caucasian race… So is it true then that which the newspapers tell us? Would we
truly ask those who were there before us to move hundreds of miles without any legal cause simply
because we want their lands? We seem to be committing a crime….a crime that deprives us as well as the
Cherokees of a country… will the American government steal? Will it lie? Will it kill?.....
Station 5: Trail of Tears painting by Robert Lindeneux (1942).
 Station 6: Cave Johnson (US Postmaster General and US Congress Representative of Tennessee district
#9), letter to President Andrew Jackson - March 1831

“The policy of removing the Indians…to any of the states west of the Mississippi...was first adopted during
the administration of Jefferson…Experience has clearly demonstrated that, in the contact between
civilized and savage (Native American) man, the savage readily yields to all the vices of man (violence,
drunkenness, greediness), and none of the good characteristics of civilized man, and soon becomes more
degraded than if left in his savage state.  Thus, separating the Natives and Christian Americans is good for
the Natives... thus this measure is necessary not only for preserving the Indian man, but also for the
harmony and peace of US citizens in the states of Tennessee and Georgia…. So wise is your idea Mr.
President in the execution of this idea.... The citizens of Tennessee will soon many benefits from this
bill….Tennessee is blessed with fertile soil and a healthful climate, equalled by but few other countries,
opening up this land will make her citizens happy and allow her to develop the resources of this region,
giving the US many riches...the lands will be used to develop fields of cotton, bringing the US riches
unheard of prior...and bring civilization to an otherwise wild part of our world…I have spoken to the
people of Tennessee, this is what they want more than anything…” 
 Station 7: Address made by a council of Cherokee people to the United States in July 1830.

We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi.
We think otherwise. Our people universally think otherwise…. there is probably not an adult person in the
Cherokee nation, who would think it best to remove…

We wish to remain on the land of our fathers...we see nothing but ruin before us. The country west of the
Arkansas territory is unknown to us. From what we can learn of it, we have no prepossessions in its favor.
All the inviting parts of it, as we believe, are preoccupied by various Indian nations...They would regard us
as intruders, and look upon us with an evil eye... All our neighbors, in case of our removal, though
crowded into our near vicinity, would speak a language totally different from ours, and practice different
customs…Were the country to which we are urged much better than it is represented to be and were it
free from the objections which we have made to it, still it is not the land of our birth, nor of our affections.
It contains neither the scenes of our childhood, nor the graves of our fathers….