I read this on the heels of H.W. Brands’ Jackson biography Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times. The Meacham book is different from a biography as it focuses on the Presidential years.
I enjoyed this more than the Brands book. Meacham did a great job presenting a full picture about what he was like, what motivated him, and his philosophy of governing.
What Exactly Was His Philosophy?
There some seeming contradictions with Jackson, but Meacham helped to put his philosophy into an overall framework that was generally consistent.
He amassed more power for himself and the Presidency but was still at heart a “limited government” kind of guy. Meacham explains that Andrew Jackson has a limited government view in line with his Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican roots, but he also felt that when the Federal government exercised power, the Presidency should have more of a voice. You can think of the battle being the Presidency vs Congress & the Supreme Court, more than about the size and scope of the government. This helps explain how he is both behind the "power grabbing" acts of beginning the Spoils System to entrench the federal bureaucracy with people more supportive of him, and ignoring Supreme Court rulings he didn’t like, but is also behind the "limited government" acts of destroying the National Bank and vigilantly paying off the National Debt.
Another Jackson puzzle: He was a devoted Unionist, but also sometimes acted to defend “state’s rights”. Few things motivated Andrew Jackson more than preserving and strengthening the Union, and few things angered him more than threats of succession. However, he was not interested in moving more power from the states to the Union. And in fact, since he was pro-slavery, he defended things like South Carolina suppressing abolitionist writings. But while he supported states making their own decisions on items he viewed as in their purview, when South Carolina decided to nullify the tariff law and threaten succession, he fought relentlessly.
Jackson is viewed by himself and his fans as a champion of the weak against the powerful, but he also supported slavery and the forced expulsion of Native Americans from their lands. Andrew Jackson would fight for all he is worth for people he viewed as part of his circle. But Jackson viewed blacks and Native Americans as “them” and not “us”. He wasn’t sadistic, and in fact in his own paternalistic mind he was doing what he thought was best for those groups. But, if they were in the way of what he wanted for white Americans, he would ruthlessly trample over them. I think this lens helps explain how in certain respects you can consider him courageous and selfless, but also understand why many would consider this an ignorant and offensive way to look at him.
Theodore Frelinghuysen and Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Policy
Meacham summarizes Jackson’s views on the treatment of Native Americans to be on the “extreme end of mainstream”. I think this is too forgiving. There were many others who had similar views, but Jackson was not just a “product of his times”. He was a leader that *created* those views and implemented those actions. One of the things I’d like to remember from this book is being introduced to Theodore Frelinghuysen, a Senator from New Jersey. Frelinghuysen argued valiantly and eloquently against the Indian Removal Act, and even wrote: “… where the Indian always has been, he enjoys an absolute right still to be, in free exercise of his own modes of thought, government, and conduct.” Freelinghuysen’s views were in the minority, but were not an outlier, so people of the time like Jackson can’t just say they didn’t know any better. As Meacham argues, “there is nothing redemptive about Jackson’s Indian policy”. Also, while the removal actions couldn’t have been done “humanely”, Meacham argues it could have been done in a less inhumane way, and Jackson failed to even do that.
Like Him or Not, He Usually Won
Jackson won almost all of the political battles he fought during his presidency. Two things stood out after reading Meacham. One, he was a very cunning tactician. Even though he was quick to anger, and his temper was legendary, he would plan out his actions, and he was a very good strategist. And two, he was relentless. Once he decided he was going to fight for something, he would give everything he has, and wouldn’t rest until his opponent was destroyed. It’s a shame he wasn’t on the side of Angels more often.
The Petticoat Affair
Meacham wrote a lot about the Petticoat Affair. If you don’t know it, a short summary: salacious rumors swirled around Margaret Eaton, the wife of the Secretary of War. She was also rather outspoken, giving people another possible reason to dislike her. But, Jackson defended her, perhaps sympathizing with her due to his own experiences of salacious rumors about his own wife. Some of the cabinet wives refused to call on her at her home or receive her in their own homes, which was a *huge* deal back then. It divided Jackson’s whole Cabinet and made dealing with day-to-day affairs very challenging. You might find that Meacham over-covered this, but I liked it. It helped paint a picture of what life was like back then, and showed women were important in shaping events, even though they often had to act behind the scenes. Also, it was quite entertaining!