Argumentative Essay: Was Andrew Jackson Guilty?

514 Words3 Pages

There has been a lot of controversy of Andrew Jackson, whether he was a good president or one that destroyed the office of the presidency. However, Andrew Jackson is not guilty. He was a good president and should not be accused of degrading the office of the presidency. The first aspect which people accuse Andrew Jackson of wrong doing is what everyone calls The Spoils System. Andrew Jackson came into office, and designed a rotation. The rotation would let everyone who worked for the previous president go and let Andrew hire anyone he wanted to work for him. All it was is a rotation. He gets to choose his people of state, why can’t he choose the people that work for him? And just because no other president has done it before him doesn’t …show more content…

The act he created was made to relocate Indians off of American land. The biggest outcome of this was the Trail of Tears. On this trail, 16,000 cherokees walked through one of the hardest winters in American history, and only 12,000 survived. Many people blame this on Andrew Jackson, but it was not Andrew which killed them, it was the winter. The US even bought the land before, so the Indians shouldn’t have been there anyway. Also, No other tribe under the Indian Removal Act had a problem getting to the new land. Andrew Jackson gave them two options. Leave, or Assimilate. Leaving would fix the conflicts between whites and Indians, and assimilating would be easy because their way of life was very similar. The indians chose to ignore Andrew Jackson, and stayed. Andrew Jackson stood firm, and kicked them out. The could have left earlier, but they didn’t. And because of it, they got trapped in the harsh winter. In conclusion, many will still argue that Andrew Jackson is guilty and was a bad president for his wrong doings. But I have come to the conclusion that Andrew Jackson is not guilty for corrupting the office of the presidency, and was a good president in American

Open Document