The Life of Andrew Jackson

by Robert V. Remini

The British later admitted to casualties totaling 2,037. Jackson received a report which claimed a total of 13 Americans killed, 39 wounded, and 19 missing in action.9 It was a stupendous victory. It was the greatest feat of American arms up to that time. It was a splendid climax to a not-so-splendid war, the War of 1812, a war that had provided not victories but one American defeat after another. Until New Orleans.

Jackson never acquired an adequate education, even for the late eighteenth century, and this severely hampered his efforts as President to achieve some of his most cherished goals.

Of history and political science, Jackson knew next to nothing. His own political sense later on seems to have been intuitive and formed out of his own personal experiences.

Andrew Jackson was a fighting cock all his life who was very kind to hens who clucked about him for protection and sustenance; but he would savage with beak and spur any other cock who dared to challenge him or question his word. Undoubtedly these unpleasant traits resulted in some measure from his living with the Crawfords as a poor relation; he also lacked the guidance of a strong father figure who could ween him from his inclination to bully. There was anger deep inside young Andrew and it appeared at a very early age. The years of deprivation in several forms (a missing father, possible humiliation in accepting charity from relatives, and the subsequent deaths of his brothers and mother leaving him orphaned at the age of thirteen, to mention only the most obvious) probably provoked this hostility. It never totally left him. Until the day he died he could suddenly explode in rage over some slight or offense and then go to infinite pains to seek revenge against the offender.

He eventually grew to six feet and he remained slender—even cadaverous—all his life. Until the very end of his life when he became unnaturally bloated from his various diseases, Andrew Jackson never weighed more than 145 pounds. What remains of his clothing show his arms and legs to be extremely thin.

The American Revolution was one long agony for Andrew Jackson. Perhaps there were moments, when he felt like a patriot and hero, but most of the time he experienced hardship, pain, disease, multiple wounds of the head and fingers, and grief arising from the annihilation of his immediate family. He emerged from the Revolution burdened with sorrow and a deep-seated depression. He saw himself as a participant “in the struggle for our liberties” and he never forgot the price that he and others had paid to secure them.26 He also emerged marked with deep patriotic and nationalistic convictions, which remained with him for the remainder of his life.

He did not trouble himself with devouring law books, it was said, because he “was more in the stable than in the office.” He was often away on “parties of pleasure” and was considered “quite a beau in the town.” Between horses and parties, Andrew had quite a time for himself. He indulged in drunken sprees and practical jokes. One of his favorite tricks was moving outhouses to far-off places. Others included stealing signposts.

He adopted all the attributes of a gentleman, someone of importance, a man of substance, a person to be reckoned with.

This first known duel says something important about Andrew Jackson. Obviously he was a hothead, and sensitive about his honor and reputation. As a gentleman, ambitious for recognition and acceptance, he understood his duty when he considered himself insulted. At the same time he was not trigger-happy, oblivious to the possibility that he might get himself killed or severely wounded. He was not an expert shot by any means, nor could he. discount Avery’s shooting ability. Thus, when a sensible solution was proposed by which his honor could be repaired and a possible danger avoided, Jackson quickly accepted it. Despite his temper and hotheadedness, he was always a cautious man, open to any legitimate compromise when it suited his interest.

Whatever the circumstances of this marriage, the union of these two remarkable people sobered their lives. The wildness in each dissipated. Jackson’s ferocious temper was considerably subdued; he became more tender and considerate of Rachel, and, if possible, more chivalric. She in turn became extremely pious. Religion became a near-obsession with her. But the bitterness and the quarrels that had disfigured her marriage to Robards were absent from her marriage to Jackson. The love Rachel and Andrew bore each other matured over the years, tested by his long absences and strengthened no doubt by the villainy of those who pricked them with vicious taunts about the origins of their union.

Highly likely that they got together while she was in her first marriage. But the town didn't treat them as dishonorable so they seemed supportive regardless.

Andrew Jackson owed a great deal to Rachel Donelson in many different ways and more than he could ever possibly acknowledge. But he loved her with a devotion and intensity that compensated for many of his deficiencies. He loved her and thought of her almost every day for the remainder of his life.

THE INDIAN MENACE PERSISTED in Tennessee, and over the next few years Jackson developed into a fire-breathing frontiersman obsessed with the Indian presence and the need to obliterate it. He railed against the Indians and against Congress. Because of the indifference of Congress, he said, innocent settlers were murdered, treaties violated, the frontier splashed with blood.

Like many western frontiersmen, Jackson had ideas about government that varied according to the issue. He would be very conservative with respect to property rights and slavery, and he would resent (if not resist) any interference by government in these matters. On the question of Indians, however, he would take the opposite view and demand full government participation in eliminating the Indian presence.

He believed in states’ rights and invariably suspected mischief by the central government.

Everything considered, Jackson failed completely as senator. He was moody and angry, plagued by debts, inarticulate in debate, and in February 1798 he fell on the ice and injured his left knee, which incapacitated him for many days.

Bean stared into Jackson’s blazing eyes. Then, as though reading something terrible in those eyes, he quietly surrendered his weapons. “There, judge,” he said, “it’s no use, I give in.” And he surrendered meekly. Several days later while sitting in prison Bean was asked why he gave up to Jackson after holding off an entire posse. “Why,” he said, “when he came up, I looked him in the eye, and I saw shoot, and there wasn’t shoot in nary other eye in the crowd; and so I says to myself, says I, hoss, it’s about time to sing small, and so I did.”4

The thirty-year history of the Allison land deal scarred Jackson for life with fearful marks of fiscal conservatism. He hated debt; paper money represented the instruments of dishonest land and stock jobbers; banks that manipulated debts and loans were an abomination.

By the time Jackson became President of the United States there were 95 slaves at the Hermitage. A few years later that number totaled 150.28 For the most part Jackson treated his slaves decently and tried to make certain they were not abused by overseers.29 But he could also be very severe. If he felt punishment merited he had his slaves whipped and on occasion chained. With runaway slaves he had little mercy. His behavior on occasion can only be described as barbaric.

Jackson’s life may have been saved because of the loose-fitting coat he wore. Because of it, Dickinson misjudged his target and instead of piercing Jackson’s heart he buried a bullet next to it that remained in place for the remainder of Jackson’s life. More than-a month passed before the General could move around without difficulty. The wound never properly healed and caused Jackson considerable discomfort thereafter. The fact that he lived for nearly forty years with this foreign object next to his heart says something extraordinary about the strength, will, and character of Andrew Jackson.

This is from a duel over horse racing.

Given his own involvement it is not surprising that he felt solicitous about Burr. But his sense of loyalty also compelled him to testify on his friend’s behalf. It was one of his most striking personal characteristics. He was examined by a grand jury after he arrived in Richmond, along with approximately fifty other witnesses.14 But his appearance before the grand jury did not have the impact of the wild speeches he delivered on the steps of the capitol building before a stunned audience. His remarks were so provocative and his rage so uncontrolled that the defense counsel decided against placing him on the witness stand in the trial that was scheduled to begin several months later. It was feared his violent outbursts would offend the jury and injure Burr’s case.

Jackson has more elevated passions than others. More rage, more love.

Disgusted, Jackson returned home, still maligning Jefferson, still labeling Wilkinson a traitor, still demanding that the administration brand Wilkinson a “Spanish hireling.” Later it was generally understood that because of his outspoken criticisms Jackson represented the anti-Jefferson, anti-Madison faction in Tennessee and that he would not support Madison’s candidacy for the presidency in 1808.

Wilkinson actually was a double agent to Spain so Jackson was right. But it harmed his relations with Jefferson/Madison.

war against Great Britain in 1812. He was forty-five years of age at the time. The causes of the war were many, but the most important one without question was psychological. Although Britain, over a period of many years, had seized American ships, impressed American sailors, tampered with American trade, and encouraged Indian raids along the northern frontier and thus provided any number of good reasons for combat, perhaps the most compelling reason driving the United States into war was the urgent need to prove its inalienable right to liberty and independence. Since winning its freedom from England the country had been subjected to a series of humiliations in one form or another. For many Americans there had grown an overpowering need to prove to the world once again that they had a right to be free and that they could successfully defend their independence against even their most powerful adversary. And there was another reason, almost as important and far more pragmatic: American expansion. For years Americans dreamed of taking Canada from England. They tried to do it during the Revolution and failed. For one thing, the acquisition of Canada would terminate British provocation of the Indians along the border. War with Britain also meant probable hostilities with her ally, Spain, and a successful war with Spain could provide the Floridas. In terms of geographic expansion, therefore, war could mean the creation of a tremendous American empire stretching from ocean to oc...

This is a much better explanation than Madison gave.

But something else emerged on that painful road back home. It was a quality in Jackson’s character that is essential to an understanding of his subsequent military successes. The quality had probably always been there but now it suddenly billowed out into full view. That quality was willpower. Not the ordinary kind. Nothing normal or even natural. This was superhuman. This was virtually demonic. This was sheer, total, concentrated determination to achieve his ends. So if he determined to march his men back to Nashville he would get them there even if it meant carrying every last one of them on his back.

Half-unconscious from the loss of blood, Jackson was lifted and carried to the Nashville Inn, his shoulder shattered by the slug and his arm pierced by a ball which lay embedded against the upper bone of his left arm. He soaked through two mattresses before the doctors could stanch the flow of blood. Every physician in Nashville worked over the wounded General, and all but one recommended the amputation of the shattered arm. “I’ll keep my arm,” ordered Old Hickory, and with that, he slipped into unconsciousness. The doctors did not dare to contradict him and they made no effort to remove the shrapnel which remained in his arm for nearly twenty years. Both wounds were dressed with poultices of elm and other wood cuttings, as prescribed by the Indians. Jackson was utterly prostrate from the great loss of blood. It was three weeks before he could leave his bed.

The massacre at Fort Mims occurred on August 30, 1813, and resulted in the deaths of almost 250 whites who “were butchered in the quickest manner. . . . The children were seized by the legs, and killed by batting their heads against the stockading. The women were scalped, and those who were pregnant were opened, while they were alive, and the embryo infants let out of the womb.”10 Red Eagle tried to stop the savagery, but many clubs were raised over his head and he was forced to withdraw to save his own life.

The Red Sticks, stunned and frightened, backed away to conceal themselves in the thick brush that covered the ground. But the troops pursued them and gave no quarter. The killing became savage. “The carnage was dreadful,” Jackson reported.43 Some headed for their canoes to escape, splashing across the river when they found them gone, only to run headlong into Coffee’s troops. Others leaped down the river bluff and concealed themselves among the cliffs that were covered with brush and fallen trees. Hour after hour throughout the afternoon the fighting continued, the troops flushing the Indians from their hiding places and shooting them when they frantically sought new cover. Now the Red Sticks were in total disarray, scampering wildly from place to place. The soldiers systematically slaughtered them. A few Indians, under cover of darkness, managed to cross the river and escape. The next day Jackson ordered a count of the dead. Some 557 Indians were found on the ground; Coffee estimated as many as 300 Creeks dead in the river; and a few dozen bodies were later discovered in the woods—a total of approximately 900 Red Sticks killed.

The Battle of Horseshoe Bend was one of the major engagements of the War of 1812. Apart from the incredible number of men killed, it crushed the Indian will and capacity to wage war just when the British were about to land troops from the Gulf and provide the hostiles with an enormous supply of arms and ammunition. Had the Creeks not been defeated so decisively they would have become a force of incalculable danger to the entire southern half of the United States.

“I am in your power—do with me what you please,” said Weatherford. “I am a soldier. I have done the white people all the harm I could; I have fought them, and fought them bravely: if I had an army, I would yet fight, and contend to the last: but I have none; my people are all gone. I can now do no more than weep over the misfortunes of my nation.” Jackson marveled at this heroic mati. He could not help but feel deep admiration for such a great leader.

Jackson’s reputation as general, as westerner, as frontiersman, as symbol, was made by the Creek War. He mirrored in splendid excess the westerner’s yearning for heroics, drama, storm. After 1814 he was altogether unique and special to frontiersmen—their beau idial—and that feeling never changed appreciably for the rest of Jackson’s life.

Lafitte was a shrewd operator. Fluent in English, Spanish, French, and Italian, he was an energetic and efficient businessman who calculated his advantages before committing himself or undertaking a financial venture. Formerly a New Orleans blacksmith, Haitian born, and a man of great courage, he was adventurous, cunning, totally unnautical, but highly successful as a practicing pirate. Since he was so practical and skillful as a man of business, he first offered his services to the British, who laid down two conditions for an alliance: the pirates must cease their attacks on Spanish shipping and they must return English booty already seized.16 That ended that. Lafitte next turned to the Americans, and after some hesitation Jackson yielded to the appeals of Livingston and a committee of the city’s leading citizens to accept the services of these “hellish banditti,” as the General called them.17 The pirates later proved very useful in manning two batteries during the British main attack against New Orleans.

“I have long viewed treaties with the Indians an absurdity,” he said, “not to be reconciled to the principles of our Government. The Indians are the subjects of the United States. .. . I have always thought, that Congress had as much right to regulate by acts of Legislation, all Indian concerns as they had of Territories.” In short, Indians had no rights if they conflicted with the security of the United States. “The Indians live within the Territory of the United States,” he declared, “and are subject to its sovereignty and . . . subject to its laws.”19

Jackson’s commitment to the principle of removal resulted primarily from his concern for the integrity and safety of the American nation. It was not greed or racism that motivated him. He was not intent on genocide. He was not involved in a gigantic land grab for the benefit of his Tennessee cronies—or anyone else. After living with the Indian problem for many years and experiencing any number of encounters with the various tribes, friendly and hostile, he came to the unshakable conclusion that the only policy that benefited both peoples, white and red, was removal. The extinction of the Indian, in his mind, was inevitable unless removal was officially adopted by the American government.

This is questionable

Congressmen who supported the move to punish or censure Jackson did so for a wide variety of reasons: some regarded the Florida operation as a clear violation of the Constitution; some worried about Jackson’s possible emergence as a “man on horseback,” like Napoleon, who was a very recent and frightening example; others hated Monroe and wanted to damage his administration; and still others, who were committed to a states rights’ philosophy, regarded the Florida expedition as a fearful extension of federal—and particularly executive—authority.

“I did believe, and ever will believe, that just laws can make no distinction of privilege between the rich and poor, and that when men of high standing attempt to trample upon the rights of the weak, they are the fitest objects for example and punishment. In general, the great can protect themselves, but the poor and humble, require the arm and shield of the law.”16 This was one of Jackson’s abiding principles. Long before he became President of the United States he articulated the fundamental doctrine of Jacksonian Democracy: the obligation of the government to grant no privilege that aids one class over another, to act as honest broker between classes, and to protect the weak and defenseless against the abuses of the rich and powerful.

Seems like he had a lot of exceptions to this doctrine.

From 1821 until his death in 1845 Jackson endured physical pain practically every day of his life. There were two bullets lodged in his body, one of which regularly formed abscesses and produced spasms of coughing resulting in massive hemorrhages. He had also contracted dysentery and malaria for which he periodically poisoned himself by taking large doses of mercury and lead in the form of calomel and sugar of lead. Still, Andrew Jackson would not yield to the infirmities of his pain-wracked body. It, too, must bend to his imperious will.

Jackson’s political thought, therefore, embraced the Revolution’s most “republican” ideals. As a first principle he affirmed the conservative doctrine of limited government. He opposed a broad definition of constitutional power. He advocated states’ rights, but the states must never regard themselves as superior to the general government. Nor did they possess the right of secession. Jackson also stressed debt reduction as an important article of faith. He regarded the national debt as a national curse and a danger to free government. For Jackson, therefore, the total elimination of the national debt became a very real objective. As President it was one of his major achievements.22

They had not realized that he exercised total control over his emotions when it suited his purpose. They assumed he was a hotheaded frontiersman. They expected him to behave like Sam Houston, who sometimes appeared in Washington dressed in Indian clothes. They thought Jackson would show up carrying “a scalping knife in one hand and a tomahawk in the other, allways ready to knock down, and scalp any and every person who differed with me in opinion.” But he surprised them. Instead of a war-whooping savage as the new senator from Tennessee they “found a man of even temper, firm in his opinions advanced, and allways allowing others to enjoy theirs, untill reason convinced them that they were in error.”40

Adams had no choice in making the offer, but Clay should have rejected it. He was too good a politician not to see the danger. He knew the risk in accepting. He had heard all the rumors of a corrupt bargain. But like a gambler, he decided to chance it. He wanted the office with a passion because it historically led straight to the presidency. For a week he deliberated. He agonized. Then, despite the clear signals of what would happen, despite his own awareness of the risk, he accepted the offer. And in that moment he destroyed forever his presidential chances.

The full emergence of this new party—which named itself the Democratic party—took several years and the combined efforts of many politicians from every section of the country. Eventually they nailed together an organization structured for the advancement of Andrew Jackson and the restoration of republicanism. “What a pleasure it is to see that party almost unbroken rising in almost every part of the Union to put down the men who have corrupted and betrayed it,” said one politician.6 The most important work of organization took place in Washington, and that phase of the operation began when Congress reconvened in December 1825. The Jacksonians began their assault on the administration almost immediately, pressuring fence sitters to recognize that a two-sided contest was developing and that they must take sides. They had a powerful weapon in their arsenal right from the beginning: the bargain. And they wielded it with gusto.

Van Buren’s move into the ranks of the Jacksonians also represented a deliberate attempt to revive the two-party system in American politics. Unlike the Founding Fathers, who cursed parties as divisive and destructive, the Magician regarded the party system as essential for representative government. Modern, efficient government, he argued, demanded well-functioning political parties openly arrayed against each other. Without parties, a democracy cannot function. A well-defined two-party system provides a balance of power between opposing forces, and this in turn safeguards liberty and the institutions of republicanism. The era of a one-party system under James Monroe produced a concentration of power in Washington that necessarily generated corruption and led inexorably to the fraudulent election of John Quincy Adams. Only a revival of the two-party system, said Van Buren, could restore the healthy interplay between opposing interests and insure order, legitimacy, and stability.12

Legitimately charged with corruption for stealing the government, the administration men answered the charge by slinging filth.

Was Henry Clay supposed to just not throw his votes to anyone? Or to someone he hated?

the cabinet was uniformly second-rate, with the single exception of Martin Van Buren. “The Millennium of the Minnows!” commented one man; and surely it ranked among the worst cabinets in the nineteenth century. For an administration intent on restoring republicanism through a vigorous program of reform, this list of its executive officers hardly inspired confidence. That it collapsed within two years is not surprising. By hobbling the cabinet with inferior appointments, Jackson only increased his own burden. Since he needed skilled administrators to implement his policies once he indicated their general direction, several newspapermen would have been better choices than those he finally selected.

The truth seems to be that Jackson was correct in his contention that corruption had been rampant for over ten years.6 Nearly half a million dollars was discovered stolen from the Treasury alone, and when combined with the thefts involving Indians, army and navy contracts, and the operations of the BUS, these facts gave substance to Jackson’s insistence that the so-called Era of Good Feelings had been in fact an Era of Corruption.

One bit of advice Van Buren offered concerned the appointment of the collector of the Port of New York. This was a very sensitive and important position. Some $15 million annually passed through the collector’s hands. If any post needed a man of the highest integrity it was this one. And when Van Buren learned that Jackson intended to appoint Samuel Swartwout to the office he almost collapsed. Not only did Swartwout have criminal tendencies but the Regency detested him. Van Buren alerted the President immediately and warned him that Swartwout’s appointment would “not be in accordance with public sentiment, the interest of the Country or the credit of the administration.” Unfortunately, Jackson refused to listen. He liked Swartwout because he had been an early supporter—unlike Van Buren—and so he went ahead with the appointment. In time, of course, Swartwout absconded with $1,222,705.09. It was a monumental theft. And when his peculations were finally uncovered a few years later, the criminal fled to Europe. Jackson was mortified. “Can he live after this?” the President cried, “or will he cut his throat?” Between Jackson and Van Buren the subject was never mentioned again. “I was too sensible of the extent of his disappointment and mortification to do so myself,” Van Buren later wrote.12 When the scandal broke, Jackson’s opponents doubled over with laughter. All the talk about rooting out corruption in government, they said, and here the greatest theft in the history of the...

The policy of white Americans toward the Indians was a disgrace, right from the beginning. Sometimes the policy was benign, such as sharing educational advantages, but more often than not it was malevolent. From the beginning Americans drove the Indians from their midst, stole their lands, and, when necessary, murdered them. To many Americans, Indians were inferior and their culture a throwback to a darker age. The steady push of settlers west and south eventually cornered approximately 53,000 Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws into 33 million acres in the southwestern section of the United States. Of these the Cherokees showed notable technological and material advances as a result of increased contact with traders, government agents, and missionaries. Naturally, there were some Americans—members of religious groups, like Quakers, for example—who strongly protested the inhuman treatment of Indians, especially when Jackson recommended transporting them beyond the Mississippi River.11

The Indian Removal Act of 1830 authorized Jackson to carry out the policy outlined in his first message to Congress. He could exchange unorganized public land in the trans-Mississippi west for Indian land in the east. Those Indians who moved would be given perpetual title to their new land as well as compensation for improvements on their old. The cost of their removal would be absorbed by the federal government. They would also be given assistance for their “support and subsistence” for the first year after removal. An appropriation of $500,000 was authorized to carry out these provisions.22 This monumental piece of legislation spelled the doom of the American Indian. It was harsh, arrogant, racist—and inevitable. It was too late to acknowledge any rights for the Indians. They had long since been abrogated. Andrew Jackson has been saddled with a considerable portion of the blame for the horror of removal. He makes an easy mark. But the criticism is unfair if it distorts the role he actually played. His objective was not the destruction of Indian life and culture. Quite the contrary. He believed that removal was the Indian’s only salvation against certain extinction. The Indian problem posed a terrible dilemma and Jackson had little to gain by attempting to resolve it. He could have imitated his predecessors and done nothing. But that was not Andrew Jackson. He felt he had a duty. And when removal was accomplished he felt he had done the American people a great service. He...

Thus began one of the most disgraceful and heart-rending episodes in American history. The Cherokees were rounded up, herded into prison camps, and then sent west along what they came to call “The Trail of Tears.” It has been estimated that some 18,000 Cherokees were removed, of whom 4,000 died as a result of their capture, detention, or westward journey. Jackson himself had retired from the presidency when the Cherokee exodus was set in motion. Still he shares much of the blame for his inhuman deed. He was so anxious to expel the red man from “civilized society” that he took little account of what his inflexible determination might cost in human life and suffering.

By the close of Jackson’s eight years in office approximately 45,690 Indians had been relocated beyond the Mississippi River. According to the Indian Office, only about 9,000 Indians, mostly in the Old Northwest and New York, were without treaty stipulations requiring their removal when Jackson left office. The operation, of course, provided an empire. Jackson acquired for the United States approximately 100 million acres of land in exchange for about $68 million and 32 million acres of western land.33

The removal of the American Indian was one of the most significant and tragic acts of the Jackson administration. It was accomplished in total violation not only of American principles of justice and law but of Jackson’s own strict code of honor. There can be no question that he believed he had acted in the best interest of the Indian, but to achieve his purpose countless men, women, and children suffered deprivation and death. Jackson’s humanitarian concerns—and they were genuine—were unfortunately shot through with ethnocentrism and paternalism that allowed little regard or appreciation of Indian culture and civilization. Andrew Jackson left office believing that thousands of Indians had found what he considered a safe haven west of the Mississippi River. He left believing he had saved the Indians from inevitable doom. And, considering the tribes which have survived to this day, perhaps he had.

This summarizes the author's main thesis on this issue. I'm not convinced about Jackson's reasons being so non malicious.

The bullet fired by Jesse Benton in 1813 stayed in his arm for nearly twenty years and caused him periods of intense discomfort. By 1831 the bullet had worked itself downward in the inner side of his arm and stationed itself below the wound and less than an inch from the surface of the skin. It could be easily felt and moved. In April 1831 he thought of going to Philadelphia “to get the bullet cut out of his arm,” and he “would have gone but for the political motives which he knew would be imputed.”11 Nine months later the pain intensified and disturbed his work schedule. Since it was so near the skin’s surface his friends and family believed that it could be extracted quite easily and that its extraction would not only end the pain but have a beneficial effect on his general health. Old Hickory agreed, and so Dr. Harris of Philadelphia was summoned to perform the operation. The procedure was swift. No anesthesia was available, of course, so Jackson simply bared his arm, gritted his jaws, grasped his walking stick, and said, “go ahead.” The surgeon made an incision, squeezed the arm, and out popped a “half ball” of the ordinary pistol size. The metal was “a good deal flattened by the contusion upon the bone and hackled somewhat on the edge.” The wound was dressed and Jackson went right back to work. What awed everyone over the next three days was that the operation in no way interrupted his attention to business, notwithstanding his long bout with the flu.12