American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House

After the Senate’s censure vote, Jackson responded on April 15, 1834, with a document titled “Protest” defending his presidency. He criticized the Senate for accusing him without a proper hearing and argued that its motive was to tarnish his and his family’s reputation. Jackson warned that accepting the censure would shift governmental power from the presidency to the legislature—particularly to the unelected Senate. Jackson concluded his protest by reflecting on his sacrifices for American liberty and his disdain for ambition or personal gain. Webster and Calhoun reacted strongly, with Webster comparing Jackson’s stance to absolutism and Calhoun condemning his ambition and boldness in claiming to be the people’s representative.

On April 14, 1834, Clay dubbed Jackson’s opponents “Whigs,” likening them to the British anti-monarchy party. He believed only the American Whigs could save the nation from Jackson, whom he accused of trying to centralize all governmental power. He even claimed Jackson admired Napoleon, asserting that the US military would resist any treasonous, usurping designs Jackson might have, reinforcing his depiction of Jackson as a potential tyrant.

On October 22, 1834, the new secretary of state, John Forsyth, negotiated with Sérurier once more. Forsyth conveyed Jackson’s long-standing patience and reliance on French justice but stated that the time had come to speak out publicly. In his annual message to Congress on December 1, Jackson detailed foreign affairs in a largely positive tone until he addressed the French issue. He expressed disappointment with France’s approach to the 1831 treaty, declaring that the United States was wholly in the right. Jackson warned that if France did not authorize payment (in compensation for harm to US trade during the Napoleonic Wars), he would seek congressional approval for reprisals on French property. By Christmas 1834, tensions with France were high, with Sérurier warning Paris of the potential for war. He suggested that France needed to act decisively, proposing that the French Navy prepare for combat to quickly defeat American forces.

The French demanded that Jackson clarify certain offensive statements before they would pay the indemnity, but he refused. Tensions rose with reports of French naval preparations, prompting Jackson to call for military readiness and consider a trade embargo. Britain mediated, and Jackson suspended the embargo call but insisted on preparedness. Due to political opposition in France, the French government insisted that it would not pay the indemnity without an apology. Negotiations continued, and Jackson realized that the issue was driven by popular forces in France, not just the king’s intentions. The British were able to reach a settlement in which France accepted Jackson’s earlier conciliatory remarks as sufficient, agreeing to pay the debt.

In January 1835, Jackson faced another assassination attempt. Jackson was leaving the House chamber when he encountered Richard Lawrence, an unemployed house painter. Lawrence’s gun misfired, and Jackson charged at Lawrence with his cane. Jackson regained his composure during the ride back to the White House but believed that the assassination attempt could be traced to his political enemies. The Globe suggested that Lawrence might have been influenced by the anti-Jackson sentiment prevalent in the Senate, which portrayed Jackson as a tyrant needing to be stopped. Jackson specifically accused Mississippi Senator George Poindexter, a known opponent, of orchestrating the attack. Senator Poindexter, insisting on his innocence, demanded an investigation following Jackson’s accusations. Jackson presented two affidavits claiming that Lawrence had been seen at Poindexter’s house, but both were discredited and the allegations were dismissed by the Senate. Without concrete evidence of a conspiracy, Blair and the Globe attributed the attack to the inflammatory speeches of anti-Jackson senators like Calhoun.

Both the Donelsons and Jackson were enslavers. The national sentiment on enslavement during Jackson’s era showed signs of change, but Jackson remained staunchly opposed to reforming enslavement policies. In July 1835, the American Anti-Slavery Society sent thousands of abolitionist pamphlets to Charleston, South Carolina. Postmaster Alfred Huger, unsure of how to proceed, sought advice from Postmaster General Amos Kendall and locked up the materials. News of the pamphlets incited a mob that destroyed them and burned effigies of abolitionist leaders. In December 1835, Jackson denounced the anti-slavery tracts as unconstitutional and asked Congress for a law to prohibit the distribution of incendiary publications in the Southern states.

However, while Jackson and Senator Calhoun agreed on slavery, they diverged on federal power. Calhoun feared Jackson’s proposal would increase federal authority and thus ultimately threaten the South. Calhoun proposed that states should decide what constituted incendiary material and control its distribution, arguing that giving Jackson the requested authority could lead to Congress having the power to abolish slavery. To maintain control and avoid promoting abolition, Jackson and Postmaster General Kendall allowed the tacit suppression of anti-slavery mailings.