QUESTION

          To what extent did Jackson's economic policies hinder the growth of American industry?

 

DOCUMENT A

So partial are the effects of the [tariff] system, that its burdens are exclusively on one side and its benefits on the other. It imposes on the agricultural interest of the South, including the Southwest, and that portion of the country particularly engaged in commerce and navigation, the burden not only of sustaining the system itself, but that also of the Government. In stating the case thus strongly, it is not the intention of the committee to exaggerate. If exaggeration were not unworthy of the gravity of the subject, the reality is such as to make it unnecessary...

Source:   South Carolina's Protest Against the Tariff of 1828. By John C. Calhoun (Anonymously).

 

DOCUMENT B

          The management of the public revenue—that searching operation in all governments—is among the most delicate and important trusts in ours, and it will, of course, demand no inconsiderable share of my official solicitude. Under every aspect in which it can be considered it would appear that advantage must result from the observance of a strict and faithful economy. This I shall aim at the more anxiously both because it will facilitate the extinguishment of the national debt, the unnecessary duration of which is incompatible with real independence, and because it will counteract that tendency to public and private profligacy which a profuse expenditure of money by the Government is but too apt to engender. Powerful auxiliaries to the attainment of this desirable end are to be found in the regulations provided by the wisdom of Congress for the specific appropriation of public money and the prompt accountability of public officers.

Source:   The First Inaugural Address of President Andrew Jackson, March 4, 1829.

 

DOCUMENT C

To the House of Representatives:

Gentlemen, I have maturely considered the bill proposing to authorize a "subscription of stock in the Maysville...Road Company," and now return the same to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, with my objections to its passage..Such grants [of money by the federal government] have always been [passed] under the control of the general principle that the works which might be thus aided should be "of a general, not local, national, not State," character.  A disregard of this distinction would of necessity lead to the subversion of the federal system.... I am not able to view [the Maysville Road Bill] in any other light than as a measure of purely local character.... It has no connection with any established system of improvements; [and] is exclusively within the limits of a State [Kentucky]....

Source:   Andrew Jackson's veto of Maysville Road Bill, 1830. 

 

DOCUMENT D

Source:   "American Progress" painted by John Gast, 1872.

 

DOCUMENT E

          Sir, I deprecate and deplore this tone of thought and feeling. I deem far otherwise of the union of the states, and so did the framers of the constitution themselves. What they said I believe; fully and sincerely believe, that the union of the states is essential to the prosperity and safety of the states. I am a unionist, and in this sense, a national republican. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. Far, indeed, in my wishes, very far distant be the day, when our associated and fraternal stripes shall be severed asunder, and when that happy constellation under which we have risen to so much renown, shall be broken up and be seen sinking star after star, into obscurity and night!....   

          Should our Union fall into pieces, which these doctrines may cause to happen, I fear to see "States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; ... a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, ... in fraternal blood!" Let us not have "Liberty first and Union afterwards", but "Liberty and Union, now and for ever, one and inseparable!

Source:  Webster-Hayne Debate, January 26, 1830 

 

DOCUMENT F

          The bill “to modify and continue” the act entitled “An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Bank of the United States” was presented to me on the 4th July instant. Having considered it with that solemn regard to the principles of the Constitution which the day was calculated to inspire, and come to the conclusion that it ought not to become a law, I herewith return it to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections.

          A bank of the United States is in many respects convenient for the Government and useful to the people. Entertaining this opinion, and deeply impressed with the belief that some of the powers and privileges possessed by the existing bank are unauthorized by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of the States, and dangerous to the liberties of the people, I felt it my duty at an early period of my Administration to call the attention of Congress to the practicability of organizing an institution combining all its advantages and obviating these objections. I sincerely regret that in the act before me I can perceive none of those modifications of the bank charter which are necessary, in my opinion, to make it compatible with justice, with sound policy, or with the Constitution of our country.

Source:   Andrew Jackson's Bank Veto, 1832.

 

DOCUMENT G

          For what would you exchange your share in the advantages and honor of the Union? For the dream of a separate independence, a dream interrupted by bloody conflicts with your neighbors and a vile dependence on a foreign power. If your leaders could succeed in establishing a separation, what would be your situation? Are you united at home? Are you free from the apprehension of civil discord, with all its fearful consequences? . . . . . But the dictates of a high duty oblige me solemnly to announce that you cannot succeed. The laws of the United States must be executed. I have no discretionary power on the subject; my duty is emphatically pronounced in the Constitution. Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their execution deceived you; they could not have been deceived themselves. They know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution of the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their object is disunion.

            But be not deceived by names. Disunion by armed force is treason. Are you really ready to incur its guilt?..... The consequence must be fearful for you, distressing to your fellow citizens here and to the friends of good government throughout the world.

Source:  Andrew Jackson issued the above proclamation appealing to the Carolinians to forsake the treacherous paths of nullification and disunion. 1832. 

 

DOCUMENT H

         As a means of effecting this end, I suggest for your consideration the propriety of setting apart an ample district west of the Mississippi, and without [outside] the limits of any state or territory now formed, to be guaranteed to the Indian tribes as long as they shall occupy it, each tribe having a distinct control over the portion designated for its use. There they may be secured in the enjoyment of governments of their own choice, subject to no other control from the United States than such as may be necessary to preserve peace on the frontier and between the several tribes. . . . .This emigration should be voluntary, for it would be as cruel as unjust to compel the aborigines to abandon the graves of their fathers and seek a home in a distant land....

Source:  President Andrew Jackson's endorsement of Indian removal, 1829. 

 

DOCUMENT I

 

DOCUMENT J

 

DOCUMENT K

 

DOCUMENT L

          In consequence of complaints which have been made of frauds speculations, and monopolies, in the purchase of the public lands, and the aid which is said to be given to effect these objects by excessive bank credits, and dangerous if not partial facilities, through bank drafts and bank deposits, and the general evil influence likely, to result to the public interests, and especially the safety of the great amount of money in the Treasury, and the sound condition of the currency of the country, from the further exchange of the national domain in this manner, and chiefly for bank credits and paper money, the President of the United States has given directions, and you are hereby instructed, after the 15th day of August next, to receive in payment of the public lands nothing except what is directed by the existing laws, viz.: gold and silver….

Levi Woodbury, Secretary of the Treasury

Source:  Communicated to the Senate, December 14, 1836. President Jackson's Specie Circular of 1836. American State Papers. Documents of the Congress of the United States in Relation to Public Lands, 1835-37, Vol. VIII, p. 910. 

 

 

DOCUMENT M

          The Veto Message proceeds to insist that the Maysville and Lexington Road is not a national but a local road of sixty miles in length, and confined within the limits of a particular State. If, as that document also asserts, the power can in no case be exercised until it shall have been explained and defined by an amendment of the Constitution, the discrimination of national and local roads would seem to be altogether unnecessary. What is or is not a national road the message supposes may admit of controversy, and is not susceptible of precise definition. The difficulty which its authors imagine, grows out of their attempt to substitute a rule, founded upon the extent and locality of the road, instead of the use and purposes to which it is applicable. If the road facilitates, in a considerable degree, the transportation of the mail to a considerable portion of the Union, and at the same time promotes internal commerce among the several States, and may tend to accelerate the movements of armies, and the distribution of the munitions of war, it is of national consideration. Tested by this, the true rule, the Maysville Road was undoubtedly national.

Source:  Speech by Henry Clay before the Mechanics' Collation in the Apollonian Garden in Cincinnati, August 3, 1830. Recorded in the Daily National Intelligencer, September 1, 1830.

 

 

DOCUMENT N

          The duties of all public officers are, or at least admit of being made, so plain and simple that men of intelligence may readily qualify themselves for their performance. And I cannot but believe that more is lost by the long continuance of men in office than is generally to be gained by their experience…. In a country where offices are created solely for the benefit of the people, no one man has any more intrinsic right to official station than another. Offices were not established to give support to particular men at the public expense. No individual wrong is, therefore, done by removal, since neither appointment to, nor continuance in, office is matter of right.

Source:  J. D. Richardson, ed., Messages and Papers of the Presidents (1896), vol. 2, pp. 448-449. 

DBQ Question created by:

Mr. Jim Tomlin
Corona Del Mar H. S.
California
2002