History Essay #1: Should Andrew Jackson be celebrated or condemned as a U.S. President?

Can someone be a defender of the poor while also being a murderer of the innocent? Andrew Jackson, the 7th U.S. President, could be referred to as either “Old Hickory” or “Indian Hater.” To most Americans, he was a respectable president who defended the poor and had once led two great military achievements. To the Indians, he was a heartless murderer. There’s enough evidence to support both sides of Andrew Jackson, but knowing that there are two sides to him, should he be celebrated or condemned as president? While the case for Andrew Jackson being a good president is more popular, the case against him is rather compelling.

Andrew Jackson was indeed an “Indian Hater.” Two of his actions support this claim. One of them occurred at the Seminole Wars. The Seminole Indians, one of the Five Civilized Tribes, resided in Florida. They would offer help to runaway slaves and sometimes raided U.S. settlements. In April 1818, Andrew Jackson’s troops attempted to capture the runaway slaves and the Seminole raiders by invading Florida. He then overthrew the governor of Florida. Pensacola, Florida was successfully captured and under control of the U.S. The Seminole War continued to form a Second Seminole War and, during this time, Osceola led his followers to resist the removal treaty placed upon them by Americans. Osceola was captured and passed away in prison. His loyal followers continued to resist with force, but eventually four thousand of them were removed and hundreds of them were killed.

His second action was executed at the Trail of Tears. The Trail of Tears was an 800- mile forced march that the Cherokee had to do under the order of, again, Andrew Jackson. This time, he did not have the support and consent of the Congress. In Spring 1838, U.S. troops moved all Cherokee to Indian Territory. Andrew Jackson basically sent them on a death march. Hundreds were suffering from disease, hunger, and harsh weather. As a result, approximately 18,000 died on the march. So do we really think he is worthy of being celebrated as president?

Despite his cruelty to two of the Five Civilized Tribes, many can argue he does not show as much hate to them as we anticipate. Andrew Jackson adopted two Indian sons. One was found near his dead mother on a battlefield. His name was Lyncoya. He was educated along with Andrew Jackson’s other son. When Andrew Jackson first saw him, he took a strong interest in him and brought him home.

Andrew Jackson might be well liked by some Americans because of his military achievements. One of his greatest achievements was in spring of 1814 when he attacked the Creek Indians. He eventually had them to sign the Treaty of Fort Jackson and obtained millions of acres of land. Andrew Jackson also led 4,500 troops against 5,300 British troops in 1815 in the Battle of New Orleans. He successfully ended the War of 1812 with more than 2,000 British soldiers injured or killed and only 70 of his troops suffering a casualty. On the battlefield, he was “as tough as old hickory wood.”

Many would praise Andrew Jackson for defending the poor. Andrew Jackson disliked the National Bank and vetoed its charter bill. Why would he veto the National Bank? The National Bank took money from the poor farmers. He declared it unconstitutional and thought that it was a monopoly that existed mainly to make the rich richer. This shows a sign of leadership and consideration of the common people.

Andrew Jackson is a defender of the poor, but he is also a murderer of the innocent. He’s murdered too many Indians to count. Does that like an innocent leader? He’s killed the Creek, Seminole, and Cherokee of the Five Civilized Tribes. He shouldn’t be celebrated for this, not when many lives were put under harsh conditions and killed. Yes, he did adopt Indian children. Yes, he defended the poor. Yes, he led great military achievements. But are those enough to compensate those who died because of him?