Jacksons Implementation of the Indian Solution - Term Paper Example

SEGMENT 12 Reasons for Jackson’s implementation of the Indian solution Jackson was motivated to implement his Indian solution because he believed it would be both important to United States and individual states in the light that it would bring an end to all possible collision between authorities of the General and the State governments on the account of the Indians (Temple, Jennifer, and Alan p295). It would position an intense and refined population in hefty tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters. By opening the entire region linking Tennessee on the north and Louisiana on the south to the settlement of the whites and would hugely strengthen the southwestern frontier and make the adjacent States strong enough to repel future invasions without remote aid. Mississippi state and the western segment of Alabama will be relieved of Indian tenancy, and permit those States to progress swiftly in population, wealth, and power (Mark p134). The Indians were denied 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 advancement of crumble, which is shrinking their statistics, and possibly cause them progressively, beneath the defense of the administration and through the influence of superior advice, to shed off their savage practice and develop into an interesting, cultured, and Christian society. These results, some of them so firm and others so possible, make the absolute implementation of the plan sanctioned by Congress at their last session an object of much solicitude. Impacts of Jackson destroying the National bank According to Terry, Bilhartz and Alan (106), in 1833, President Andrew Jackson announced that the government will no longer use the country's national bank. He then used his executive control to eliminate all national finances from the bank, in the ultimate round of what is referred to as the "Bank War." A national bank initially formed by George Washington and Alexander Hamilton in 1791 to dole out as a central repository for national finances. The Second Bank of the United States was founded in 1816; five years after this first bank's contract had run out. Conventionally, the bank had been managed by a board of directors with ties to industry and processing, and thus was partial towards the modern and developed northern states. Jackson, the embodiment of frontiersman, railed against the bank's deficient of financial support for development into the unsettled Western regions. Jackson also protested against the bank's uncommon political and economic power and to the lack of congressional oversight over its business dealings. Jackson, known as obstinate and bestial but a man of the ordinary people demanded for an inquiry into the bank's policies and political agenda as soon as he settled in to the White House in March 1829. To Jackson, the institution signified how a fortunate class of businessmen oppressed the will of the common Americans. He made it plain to confront the legality of the bank, much to the dismay of its cohorts. In rejoinder, the bank’s director, Nicholas Biddle, loosened his personal political power, spinning to affiliates of Congress, as well as the influential Kentucky Senator Henry Clay and leading businessmen sympathetic to the bank, to fight Jackson (Williams p 168). According to Hoffmann (44), shortly that year, Jackson presented his case against the bank in a speech to Congress; to his vexation, its members commonly agreed that the bank was certainly legal. Still, debate over the bank remained for the subsequent three years. In 1932, the troublesomeness resulted to a crack in Jackson's cabinet and, that similar year, the pigheaded president prohibited an attempt by Congress to make a new agreement for the bank. All of this occurred through Jackson's proffer for re-election; the bank's prospect was the central spot of a harsh political campaign between the Democratic in office Jackson and his challenger Henry Clay. Jackson's guaranteed to strengthen the citizens of America and requested the voters and cemented the way for his triumph. He felt he had got a command from the public to slam the bank, in spite of Congress' objections. Biddle declared to continue wrestling the president, saying that "just because he has scalped Indians and imprisoned Judges [does not mean] he is to have his way with the bank." On September 10, 1833, Jackson eliminated all federal finances from the Second Bank of the U.S., reallocating them to various state banks, which were commonly known as "pet banks." In addition, he declared that deposits to the bank would not be accepted after October 1. Finally, Jackson had accomplished to wipe out the bank; its charter officially expired. In conclusion his actions had a negative impact on the economy. He removed the U.S. national bank and caused the Native Americans to migrate from their homeland since people could not afford to cope with the biting recession. He caused a depression because he opened so many pet banks leading to his censure in 1834 in what the senate viewed as abuse of the presidential command and privileges (Terry, Bilhartz and Elliott p74). Does the state have right to nullify a federal decision. Martha Dean, a lawyer and the Republican candidate for attorney general, thinks so. In some cases, the Supreme Court errors, so what alternative does the state posses? They have the option of nullification (Pinnegar P213). Dean, who was competing against Democrat George Jepsen in a race to become Connecticut's first new attorney general in 20 years, presented a vigorous defense of the doctrine of "nullification," that spells that states can rebuff federal laws when they believe that Washington has no authority under the U.S. Constitution to enforce them. She asserted that the tool of nullification existed as cited by Ranney (66). But in some cases, she believed the federal government has surpassed the limitations imposed by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution - which reserves powers not granted to the federal government to the individual states themselves - said she supports efforts by Connecticut and centralized power, most particularly during the run-up to the Civil War and the civil rights movement of the 1960s (Ranney 67). According to Stephens and Scheb (81), it is also considered invalid by constitutional intellectuals, said Richard Kay, a famous professor at the University Of Connecticut School Of Law. This was a very credible argument till 1865," Kay said. "But after the Civil War, what was a authentic argument about the state of the American constitutional system was appealing decisively settled on. "Since 1865 it's pretty much a settled matter, with some exceptional arguments to the divergent. The query of who has the final authority to interpret the Constitution was settled" in advocate of the U.S. Supreme Court. A Whig or a Jackson democrat I would prefer to have a Whig than a Jackson who did not value the opinions of the Americans but preferred dictatorship, coercion an example was the Indian solution that saw the native Indians pushed from the farms. He caused a massive recession in 1834 due to his populist tendencies by interfering with the national bank and allowing the mushrooming of pet banks (Finkelman 363). Finkelman (379) describes democracy is a form of administration in which all suitable citizens have an equivalent say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (direct or indirect) participation in the suggestion, growth and passage of legislation into act. It includes social, economic and cultural situations that enable the open and equal practice of political self resolve. Jackson’s record as president While Dean said her position is contentious only to "the left," nullification, also referred to as "interposition," is exceedingly contentious. It has been invoked by defenders of states' rights, for example, in some of the strongest rebellions against Barker (30) cited that Jackson was a hot-headed person and sometimes, going into replicated wrath. Sometimes, he could seem the most polite person. He made major mistakes during his rule like the elimination of the second bank of the United States, a very dubious move because the bank had done much to provide a stable environment in which business could operate. He also established the veto as unqualified prerogative of the presidency and pushed the Indians to the west of Mississippi (Urofsky p114). On a positive note he eliminated the national debt by ensuring zero corruption in public offices. Summary of segment 12 Jackson removal policy was important to United States and individual states in a way that it would end all possible collision between authorities of the General and the State governments on the account of the Indians (Temple, Jennifer, and Alan p295). Furthermore, it led to refined population in hefty tracts of country occupied by a few savage hunters and strengthens the southwestern frontier making the adjacent States strong enough to repel future invasions without remote aid. Mississippi state and the western segment of Alabama will be relieved of Indian tenancy, and permit those States to progress swiftly in population, wealth, and power (Mark p134). SEGMENT 13 Congressional compromise on slavery According to United States Congress (25) Congressional compromise on slavery was a good idea because it brought forth the agreement that no territory to the north of Missouri’s southern border (the 36° 30' parallel) could enter the Union as a slave state. This part of the compromise effectively stopped slavery from spreading into the rest of the Louisiana While Dean said her position is contentious only to "the left," nullification, also referred to as "interposition," is exceedingly contentious. It has been invoked by defenders of states' rights, for example, in some of the strongest rebellions against Barker (30) cited that Jackson was a hot-headed man sometimes irked. At other times, he could emerge the most well-mannered gentleman. He made major mistakes during his rule like the elimination of the second bank of the United States, a very dubious move because the bank had done much to provide a stable environment in which business could operate. He also established the veto as an unqualified prerogative of the presidency and pushed the Indians to the west of Mississippi (Urofsky p114). On a positive note he eliminated the national debt by ensuring zero corruption in public offices. Recognition of the Texan Independence According to Salla (87), the United States should have rewarded the Texan independence due to the following reasons: In 1831, Mexico eliminated slavery, following the guide of most western countries. This loss of due labor, if really implemented in Tejas, would have been a harsh blow to the region's up-and-coming cotton economy. It also reminisced various transferred citizens of the liberal official position of slavery upheld by the United States. The Mexican administration identified its weakened control in Tejas, eliminated immigration. The inhabitants there, who had associates and relatives in the United States was irked, As an additional way to relax the ties between the U.S. and Tejas, Mexico passed intense duty on the importation of overseas products. In 1833, General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna rose to authority in Mexico, vowing to merge control and strengthen national harmony. The increase of a Mexican nationalist was perceived with anxiety in Texans favored to proceed their close autonomy, and possibly eventual self-government. A rising group of Texans came to supported seizure by the United States as preferential to upholding self-rule. The struggle for the independence of Texas occurred over many years, although the real war that attained independence from Mexico was relatively short. In the 1820s, Stephen Austin won the Mexican government's consent to bring American families into the sparingly established Tejas (Texas) region. Immense land grants would be offered to the pioneers if Austin could support 300 families and guarantee the officials that the newcomers would: 1. Be faithful to the Mexican administration 2. Study Spanish language 3. Change to Roman Catholicism. Only the initial Texans rewarded much interest to these needs and the immense distance from the Mexican central administration left the settlers open to follow their own desires. This area's huge appeal was the rich soil, perfect for cotton production. By the early 1830s, transferred Americans, many of them slave proprietors, outnumbered the Tejanos; the Mexican administration quickly understood that it had dedicated a great mistake by enhancing the migration of U.S. citizens with a desire for independence (Salla p85). Reasons why sectarian interest vacillate between supporting and opposing western expansion According to Charlottesville and Leonard (p120-122), the plain Indians were hunters, and hunting communities were sparingly populated, covering the large tracks of land required to maintain them. By the middle of 1800s the Indians were desperately out figured by the whites. Farming communities were more compactly populated than hunting societies, and the U.S. had contemporary agricultural methods and manufacturing. In addition, it had a political harmony that the Indians lacked. The task was how to use that authority vis-a-vis the Indians. The evidence of development respecting the less influential they interacted with was pitiable –like the Japanese in opposition to the Ainu, or the Spanish adjacent to the Indians of Mexico, or the colonists along the Atlantic coastline of North America in the 1600s. The U.S. had rules on how citizen are to treat each other, and they developed accords with the Indians, but what they missed in common, in the 1800s, was sufficient respect for the Indians to implement those agreements with the same vitality that they enacted laws within the United States that is to leave the Indians as they had been before and with their liberty to their self territory. In California in 1850, the Indian population was approximately 100,000 that was always debatable. By 1850 the Gold Rush was in progress for a year. A decade afterward, California's Indian populace was tallied as 35,000. In 1860, vigilantes ambushed a small society of Indians next to Eureka, California, slaying roughly eighty, majority of them women and children. Also in 1860 a war started in the state of Nevada, a war that soared from Piute Indian reprisal against whites for the sexual assault of two Piute girls. In the early 1860s were conflicts against Apaches, Navaho, Cherokee including Shoshone of Idaho. In the early 1860s excavators were attacking the Rocky Mountains and the plains in the thousands, pressuring the Indians and producing conflicts with the Indians. Summary of segment 13 President Polk advised the congress that United States he had made unfruitful efforts to maintain mutual relation with Mexico by sending diplomatic envoys to make peace agreements which the Mexican government rejected. The attacks by the Mexican army and getting in the American territory implied the battle had begun hence the need to protect Americans. SEGMENT 14 Did Missouri compromise neglected to deal with real issues. In line with United States Congress (25) ,during the 1800s, their was the conflict-ridden matter of slavery and the Missouri concession was edged out in the congress to correct the issue of slavery but it fell short due to the subsequent grounds: 1. It failed to get rid of the underlying setbacks of slavery because slave and free states existed and the separations over slavery led to a blood-spattered civil war. 2. It made United States fall to pieces in the tribally and color forcing the Texan to demand for self-rule. 3. The senate chose no restraints on slave trade in Missouri. 4. Missouri was compelled to bond with the United States federal government as a slave nation while other united like Maine coupled as free states. Was the North the menace the South claimed, or did the North go out of its way to mollify and accommodate the South? The conflict between the North and South was deeply entrenched and more than just regions or the verdict by Supreme Court and Constitution. This called for drafting signing of fresh treaties. The North believed that if it had control, it will greatly reduce the influence of the South. This negative opinion by the North made it he problem the south had initially claimed. Did the South have a legal right to secede from the Union? If it does, how does this become slippery slope? Secession in view of political deprivation does not subsist to Southerners who never intended to live the union since the problems raised were the same as for Northerners. The challenges faced by Southerners was insignificant than genuine. This could case despair to the conservatists who were interested to maintain strong ties for the synergy advantage. Did Southern Politicians engage in demagoguery? The politicians made false claims on white superiority used as a tool to connect electorates. This system recognized some sense of hastiness, awareness, and demagoguery. Race factor was politically used to strike good rapport with uninterested southerners who mainly the whites Role played by abolitionist and southern newspapers in shaping public opinion David and Douglass’s (67-68) stressed that with the slaves of rebels pronounced freed, much of the Black abolitionist press directed its interest to the struggle to abolish racial bigotry in public housing in the North as well as endeavors to eradicate racially restraining articles in voting laws and the fight to conclude discrimination in public haulage. The Black press paid consideration to the occurrences of Black soldiers on the battlefield. Expected letters from the Black soldiers on the frontage, offered invaluable reporting of experiences in the military. From clashes at Fort Wagner to Fort Pillow, it was lucid that, contrary to known conviction, African Americans were enthusiastic to battle and die for the basis. Work along with freedmen was key news item in the abolitionist and Black press, as did the fight by Black armed forces for equivalent compensation. January 1, 1863, was Jubilee day, a crucial period on the strive for equality and a reaffirmation of the belief in a deity of impartiality, the law of advancement, and the call for unremitting agitation.  Did slave revolts like Turner’s hurt the abolitionist cause? It had toughened divisional hostility, enhancing secession chances to occur. This motivated the southern politicians to tighten the current laws sustaining slavery. It was afterward revoked after rancorous contest of northern and southern politicians. Summary of segment 14 Black abolitionist directed its concern to the struggle to abolish racial bigotry in public housing in the North as well as endeavors to eradicate racially restraining articles in voting laws and the fight to conclude discrimination in public haulage. Black soldiers on the battlefield offered invaluable reporting of experiences in the military. African Americans were enthusiastic to battle and die for the basis. Work along with freedmen was key news item in the abolitionist and Black press, as did the fight by armed forces. WORK CITED Temple, Jennifer, and Alan R. Velie. Encyclopedia of American Indian literature. New York: Facts on File, 2007. Print. Mark .D. Ledbetter,America's Forgotten History: Part Two. Rupture, Lulu.com: 2010. Print. Terry,Bilhartz, Alan C. Elliott,Currents in American History: A Brief History of the United States: M.E. Sharpe, 2007.Print. Williams, William Appleman. The contours of American history. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1988. Print. Susan Hoffmann. Politics and Banking: Ideas, Public Policy, and the Creation of Financial Institutions: JHU Press, 2001.Print. Pinnegar, Charles. Virginia and state rights, 1750-1861: the genesis and promotion of a doctrine. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., 2009. Print. Ranney A. Joseph. In the Wake of Slavery: Civil War, Civil Rights, And the Reconstruction of Southern Law: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006. Print. Norton B. Mary, Sheriff Carol, Blight W. David, Chudacoff P. Howard, Fredrik Logevall. A People & A Nation: A History of the United States: Gale: Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. Stephens H. Otis, Jr., Scheb M. John, II. American Constitutional Law: Sources of Power and Restraint. Gale: Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. Finkelman Paul.Encyclopedia of African American History, 1619-1895: From the Colonial Period to the Age of Frederick Douglass, London. Oxford University Press, 2006. Print. Urofsky I. Melvin.The American Presidents. Illinois: Taylor & Francis, 2000. Print. Barker L. Jefferson. Jesse Jackson's 1984 Presidential Campaign: Challenge and Change in American Politics. Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1989. Print. United States. Congress. Congressional Edition, Volume 772. California: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1855.Print. Salla E. Michael. The Hero's Journey Toward a Second American Century .Gale: Greenwood Publishing Group James M. Mcpherson, The Struggle For Equality. Abolitionists and the Negro in the Civil War and Reconstruction, (Princeton: Princeton University Press,1964), 76-80, 86- 88, 93, 125-127; Wendy Hamand Venet, Neither Ballots Nor Bullets: Women Abolitionists and the Civil War, (CharlottesvillThomas C. Leonard, "News for a Revolution: The Expose in America, 1773-1776," Journal of American History 67 (June 1980): 26.e: University of Virginia Press, 1991), 120-122.p, 2002. Print. David W. Blight, Frederick Douglass's Civil War: Keeping Faith With Jubilee (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988), 67-68 Read More