Andrew Jackson, Southerner

XVII: “I Have Been Opposed Always to the Bank”

160 XVII “I Have Been Opposed Always to the Bank” As a result of his actions during the Eaton affair and his stance in favor of Indian removal and against nullification, Jackson made many enemies during his first presidential term. During his second four years Jackson’s opponents united to form a new political party, the Whigs, as a result of his conflict with the Second Bank of the United States (BUS). More than any other issue, the so-called Bank War displayed the fissures in Jackson’s support, as charges of executive dictation and concerns about the nation’s economic future led the president’s southern allies and even his kin to flee to the Whig party. Jackson had not always opposed financial institutions such as the one on Philadelphia’s Chestnut Street, even after losing thousands of dollars because of bad financial decisions. But he had long distrusted them. He told Thomas Hart Benton in 1832 that a “secrete and combined movement of the aristocracy” had tried to establish a BUS branch in Nashville several years earlier, and he had opposed its charter. He believed that it “would drain the state of its specie to the amount of its profits for the support and prosperity of other places, and the Lords, Dukes and Ladies of foreign countries who held the greater part of its stock.” “I have been opposed always to the Bank of the u.s. as well as all state Banks” that issued paper money, he explained to the Missouri senator.1 Jackson held suspicions about the BUS and its corrupting influences during the 1824 and 1828 campaigns, and they persisted into his presidency . Although Jackson initially indicated to the Bank’s president, Nicholas Biddle, that he bore no particular ill will toward the institution, his mind changed as reports came from Kentucky early in his presidency that the Lexington and Louisville branches of the BUS had deliberately supported Adams and refused loans to Jackson’s allies. After an investigation Biddle reported that no illegalities had taken place. The accusations in Kentucky were followed by more allegations of wrongdoing in New “I Have Been Opposed Always to the Bank” | 161 Hampshire. Once again, Biddle concluded that it was a misunderstanding and dismissed any further talk of improper influence.2 Jackson did not immediately act against the Bank. In his first annual message, delivered in December 1829, he gave only two paragraphs to the subject. While not rancorous, the message gave Biddle fair warning that Jackson was on watch. The president recognized the effect that his comments would have on Bank supporters, “who prised self interest more than the perpetuity of our liberty, & the blessings of a free republican government .” Over the next two years Jackson continued to hint at his suspicions about the Bank. His second annual message suggested that the BUS should “be shorn of the influence” that allowed it to “[operate] on the hopes, fears, or interests of large masses of the community.” Its continuation would only lead to “occasional collisions with the local authorities and perpetual apprehension and discontent on the part of the States and the people.” Distracted by the breakup of his cabinet over the Eaton affair, the president seems to have given little real thought to the future of the BUS. His third annual message agreed to let Congress decide the issue.3 Biddle failed to grasp the conciliatory branch that Jackson had extended to him. He continued to authorize the publication of newspaper articles defending the Bank against what he viewed as unwarranted attacks by the administration. When warned that his actions simply reinforced Jacksonian charges that the Bank was inappropriately involved in politics, Biddle refused to heed such counsel. Henry Clay, who early on in Jackson’s first term began positioning himself as the president’s major challenger in 1832, encouraged his stubbornness. The Kentuckian was looking for an issue to galvanize voters behind his campaign, and he believed the Bank was just what he needed. He was convinced that any attempt to veto a recharter bill would likely prove the death knell to Jackson’s election chances. Clay advised Biddle to request a recharter from Congress, even though the existing contract was not due to expire until 1836. Clay believed that Jackson and his followers would either have to support the recharter and undermine their public opposition or reject it and risk alienating voters who were concerned about their financial future.4...