Presidents
Spoils System
The Jackson Administration
Jacksonian Democracy showed its face on inauguration day when crowds of celebrating
supporters stormed the White House. Muddy boots trampled the fine carpeting, crystal and
china were shattered, and all the food and drink were quickly consumed. Disapproving
National Republicans spoke fearfully about the accession of “King Mob.”
Many inauguration-day revelers were in Washington hoping to find government jobs. The
term “spoils system” refers to the conferral of office on people based upon political concerns
rather than fitness for office. Viewed in its best light, it was a further expression of increased
democratization in American politics—one need not be a member of the elite in order to
govern.
Upon assuming office, Jackson was intent upon punishing his opponents and ridding the
government of the services of those who represented the financial interests of New England.
Martin Van Buren was named secretary of state and John H. Eaton as secretary of war; both
were strong political allies of the president.
During his two administrations, Jackson replaced less than twenty percent of federal office
holders. That percentage was in line with his predecessors, but differed in that Jackson's
dismissals were clearly more politically motivated.
A Jackson supporter, Sen. William L. Marcy, was responsible for providing a name for this
practice when he declared, “To the victor belong the spoils.”
The spoils system remained an important part of the political landscape until the civil service
reforms toward the end of the century.
In actual practice, Jackson often avoided drawing upon the wisdom of his formal cabinet
officials, preferring to confer frequently with an informal group of friends dubbed the
“kitchen cabinet.”
Nullification Crisis
United States History
Toward the end of his first term in office, Jackson was forced to confront the state of South Carolina
on the issue of the protective tariff. Business and farming interests in the state had hoped that Jackson
would use his presidential power to modify tariff laws they had long opposed. In their view, all the
benefits of protection were going to Northern manufacturers, and while the country as a whole grew
richer, South Carolina grew poorer, with its planters bearing the burden of higher prices.
The protective tariff passed by Congress and signed into law by Jackson in 1832 was milder than that
of 1828, but it further embittered many in the state. In response, a number of South Carolina citizens
endorsed the states' rights principle of "nullification," which was enunciated by John C. Calhoun,
Jackson's vice president until 1832, in his South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828). South
Carolina dealt with the tariff by adopting the Ordinance of Nullification, which declared both the
tariffs of 1828 and 1832 null and void within state borders. The legislature also passed laws to enforce
the ordinance, including authorization for raising a military force and appropriations for arms.
Nullification was only the most recent in a series of state challenges to the authority of the federal
government. There had been a continuing contest between the states and the national government
over the power of the latter, and over the loyalty of the citizenry, almost since the founding of the
republic. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, for example, had defied the Alien and
Sedition Acts, and in the Hartford Convention, New England voiced its opposition to President
Madison and the war against the British.
In response to South Carolina's threat, Jackson sent seven small naval vessels and a man-of-war to
Charleston in November 1832. On December 10, he issued a resounding proclamation against the
nullifiers. South Carolina, the president declared, stood on "the brink of insurrection and treason,"
and he appealed to the people of the state to reassert their allegiance to that Union for which their
ancestors had fought.
When the question of tariff duties again came before Congress, it soon became clear that only one
man, Senator Henry Clay, the great advocate of protection (and a political rival of Jackson), could
pilot a compromise measure through Congress. Clay's tariff bill -- quickly passed in 1833 -- specified
that all duties in excess of 20 percent of the value of the goods imported were to be reduced by easy
stages, so that by 1842, the duties on all articles would reach the level of the moderate tariff of 1816.
Nullification leaders in South Carolina had expected the support of other Southern states, but
without exception, the rest of the South declared South Carolina's course unwise and
unconstitutional. Eventually, South Carolina rescinded its action. Both sides, nevertheless, claimed
victory. Jackson had committed the federal government to the principle of Union supremacy. But
South Carolina, by its show of resistance, had obtained many of the demands it sought, and had
demonstrated that a single state could force its will on Congress.
The Second Bank of the United States was chartered for many of the same reasons as its
predecessor, the First Bank of the United States. The War of 1812 had left a formidable debt.
Inflation surged ever upward due to the ever-increasing amount of notes issued by private
banks. Specie was jealously hoarded. For these reasons President Madison signed a bill
authorizing the 2nd Bank in 1816 with a charter lasting 20 years.
The Second Bank of the United States, located in Philadelphia, held a misleading title. In
actuality, it was under private control but was granted a charter by the federal government
which enabled the two separate entities to share in financial ventures which would have
proven to be mutually prosperous. The Bank was comprised of twenty five directors, five of
which were appointed by the government. Stocks were held by private investors, both
foreign and domestic. Aside from the directors, the Bank also had a president.
Because of the unique relationship between it and the government, the Bank was awarded
special privileges, among these were its being a storehouse for public funds. The Bank could
then use these funds for its own purposes without paying interest. It could issue bank notes
and was not required to pay state taxes. It was also understood that Congress was not to
charter any comparable financial institution. In return, the Bank was to pay a bonus of one
and a half million dollars, public funds were transferred and payments made with no charge
and the government was to appoint five of the Bank directors.
In the late 1820s a titanic clash erupted between President Jackson and bank President
Nicholas Biddle. On one side was Andrew Jackson, Old Hickory, and his supporters who
claimed the Bank was a threat to the republic due to its economic power. State bankers felt
the central bank's influence frustrated their ability to function. Westerners and farmers
claimed the bank was a baleful tool of city folks and overseas interests. On the other side
stood Nicholas Biddle, an urbane Philadelphian; before banking he started a literary
magazine called the Port Folio. He traveled the world and found the splendor of Greece most
compelling.
Jackson used Secretary of State Livingston to his advantage when Livingston and Biddle had
a meeting and Livingston urged him to take caution. He informed him that Jackson had even
more hostility towards any proposal for recharter. He warned that because Jackson would be
seeking re-election, any attempt to recharter would be regarded as political interference.
Afterwards, he stated, Jackson would be willing to allow the Bank to apply for recharter and
allow the Congress to decide. Jackson did cease his active hindrance towards recharter but
only as a shrewd political maneuver. Rather than use the opportunity to go along with
Jackson and work on a timetable for proposing recharter after the election Biddle went
forward with his request to Congress and applied for recharter in 1832, four years early. This
seemingly spiteful act on the eve of peace ensured that the war would continue and,
according to one source, "forever doomed his [Biddle's] institution."
The repercussions of this move on Biddle's part were felt almost immediately. On July 10,
1832, Jackson placed a veto on the recharter proposal. In his veto message, he stated that the
Bank was "subversive of the rights of the states." Jackson used this important and historic
veto to inform the American public of the evils of the Bank, calling it a monopoly where most
of the stock was held by foreigners. Ultimately Jackson triumphed when he vetoed
Congress's 1832 recharter. Jackson considered his 1832 election triumph over pro-bank
candidate Henry Clay a mandate of his anti-bank policy. The bank ceased to function in 1836.