THE BUILDER JULY 1925

Andrew Jackson, the Man and Mason

By BRO. ERIK MCKINLEY ERIKSSON, Professor of History, Lombard
College, Illinois
(Concluded from last month.)


UP to the time he was about forty-five years old, Jackson had done
little to attract attention outside the boundaries of his own
state. During the years between 1804 and the beginning of the War
of 1812 he refrained from office holding, and devoted his attention
to an unsuccessful mercantile enterprise at Clover Blossom, and
more successfully to the pursuits of a planter.

The outbreak of the War of 1812 was his golden opportunity and he
was ready to embrace it. In 1802 he had been elected Major General
of the Tennessee militia and so had kept in touch with military
affairs. In 1812 he was commissioned a Major General of United
States volunteers and took charge of the military operations in the
southwest. His first great success came with the crushing of the
Creek Indians at the battle of Horse-Shoe, or Tohopeka, in the
spring of 1814. This removed a serious menace on the frontier, for
these Indians had been incited by the British to hostilities.

HE WINS THE GREAT BATTLE OF NEW ORLEANS

He next turned his attention to the British expedition designed to
over-run the southwest. Against them he achieved the crowning
victory of his career, when, on the 8th of January, 1815, he
defeated the British at New Orleans. With a small force of
frontiersmen sheltered behind a rude barricade, Jackson annihilated
the attacking force of 5,000 picked British soldiers. While the
Americans lost seventy-one men in the day's fighting the British
lost 2,137, including their commander, Sir Edward Pakenham.

After the close of this war, Jackson remained in the military
service, but it was not until 1817 that he again saw active
service. The Seminole Indians of Florida were continually causing
trouble on the frontier, and finally Jackson was ordered to proceed
against them. The Indians avoided fighting and sought shelter in
the Spanish territory of Florida. Without hesitation, Jackson
pursued them across the boundary, captured the Spanish city of
Pensacola, and executed two captured British subjects, Alexander
Arbuthnot and Robert Ambrister, who had been inciting the Indians.
These acts involved our government in diplomatic difficulties, but
indirectly Jackson's action was the means of forcing Spain to sell
Florida to the United States. Furthermore, he secured peace on the
frontier.

From henceforth Jackson was to be prominent in politics rather than
in war. Though he retained his army commission until 1821, he did
no more fighting. He had shown himself to be a great general, one
who was later described by one of his bitterest political
opponents, Daniel Webster, as the greatest American general, next
to George Washington. Certainly he was an excellent fighter, and
though lacking in a knowledge of military science, he achieved
results-- and that is the true test of greatness.

After the Seminole affair, Jackson returned to Tennessee, but in
1821 went to Florida to serve as the first Governor of the newly
acquired territory. After a turbulent period of a few months in
that office, he resigned Dec. 1, 1821.

Again freed from official cares he returned to his beloved
"Hermitage," his home, near Nashville. It was now that the Masons
conferred on him the highest honor within their power. On Oct. 7,
1822, the "Annual Communication" of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee
began at Nashville, and Andrew Jackson was seated as a Past Master
of a subordinate lodge. On the same day he was elected Grand Master
and installed in the office. In 1823 he was elected to serve for
another year. He performed his duties in an able and efficient
manner. His sincere interest in Masonry was shown when he called
the Grand Lodge into special session for one week for the purpose
of standardizing the work of the three degrees.

But the Hero of New Orleans, popularly called "Old Hickory," was
not allowed to remain in retirement from public cares. In 1823 he
was elected to the United States Senate, but he had already been
put before the country as a candidate for the Presidency. At the
time there was only one political party, the old Republican, and
the four candidates, Andrew Jackson, John Q. Adams, Henry Clay, and
William H. Crawford, were all members of it. The popular election
in November, 1824, proved indecisive. Though Jackson received the
largest vote, his electoral vote was only ninety-nine to
eighty-four for Adams, fortyone for Crawford, and thirty-seven for
Clay.

HE WAS DEFEATED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

The election was now carried to the House of Representatives, as
provided by the Constitution. When the vote was taken on Feb. 9,
1825, Adams received the vote of thirteen states and thus was
elected, while seven states voted for Jackson, and four for
Crawford. Clay had thrown his influence to Adams, and when he
became Secretary of State in the new cabinet, Jackson and his
followers became convinced that a "corrupt bargain" had been made
between Clay and Adams.

Inspired by this belief and feeling that the true will of the
people had been thwarted, Jackson resigned from the Senate and
threw his energies into the campaign for the Presidency at the next
election. Backed by an efficient organization which effectively
used the press as well as other agencies of propaganda, and after
a bitterly fought campaign lasting almost four years, Jackson was
elected over John Q. Adams, and was inaugurated on March 4, 1829,
as seventh President of the United States.


The turbulent events of the following eight years cannot be
understood without a comprehension of people who put Jackson into
office. Among the supporters of the new President were included
three classes: the southern aristocratic planters who were imbued
with the Jeffersonian ideas of democracy; the laboring classes of
the north; and the frontiersmen of the region west of the
Appalachians. The last named group was easily the dominant one and
gave its character to the Jacksonian Democracy. It was this group
which Andrew Jackson truly represented.

The outstanding characteristic of this pioneer frontier democracy
was its devotion to the idea of equality of opportunity. To these
people, social antecedents counted for little. They did not ask a
man from whence he came but they expected him to play a man's part.
Everyone had his opportunity to achieve success; he who failed
received scant consideration, while the man who showed the
qualities of leadership was soon accorded fitting recognition.

The frontier idea of equality was not a theory which would make
everyone alike. There was nothing of the communistic idea in it.
Each man had an equal opportunity to gain wealth and distinction.
Property was acquired by hard toil under the most discouraging
conditions. There was no thought of equal distribution whereby the
shiftless and indolent would benefit by the exertions of the
ambitious.

The frontiersman was ever ready to co-operate with his neighbors
when there was need, he was hospitable and helpful, but was far
from being communistic in his conception of society. The democracy
of the frontier well illustrated the idea that brotherhood means
not literal economic, social and political equality, but equality
of opportunity, and is to be attained by justice and not by
communism.

The equalitarian ideas of the frontier were well illustrated in
politics. The man who was a successful Indian fighter was expected
to make the best Judge or Congressman. It was thought that any
upstanding man was qualified for any office, and consequently these
western Democrats opposed the idea of a permanent office-holding
class. They believed ardently in political democracy, equality of
economic opportunity, and just as ardently opposed monopolies and
special privilege.

Of this class Jackson was the typical and outstanding
representative. Because he interpreted their will so accurately,
the era in which he occupied the presidential chair has been called
the period of "Jacksonian Democracy."

No President of the United States has more truly represented the
people who elected him than did Andrew Jackson, and this is one of
his chief claims to greatness. When he performed the acts which
marked his Presidency he was but carrying out the will of the new
democracy. It has been said that Jefferson inaugurated "government
of the people, for the people," but that it remained for Jackson to
add "by the people."

"TO THE VICTOR BELONG THE SPOILS!"

This explains why President Jackson allowed the "spoils system,"
the idea of "to the victors belong the spoils," to be applied to
the national civil service. The new democracy were ardent believers
in the idea of rotation in office; the spoils system had long been
practiced in the states; and it was inevitable that it should now
be applied to those holding office under the national
administration. If Jackson had not introduced it some other
President would have done so. He did not apply the system as
extensively as later Presidents for, during his eight years in the
Presidency, only about one-fifth, or 2,000 out of approximately
11,000 holding office under the Federal Government, were removed.

Likewise, his refusal, in 1832, to sign the bill rechartering the
Second Bank of the United States was due largely to the belief of
himself and his constituency that it was aristocratic and
monopolistic in character and dangerous in a democratic government.
That he truly interpreted the will of the people was shown by his
re-election in 1832 with the question of the bank re-charter as the
chief issue. Jackson has been severely denounced for his lack of
knowledge concerning finances, but history has vindicated him in
this matter. The United States has never gone back to the plan of
having its finances handled by a single privately controlled
corporation. Could he have had his way "hard money" would have
taken the place of the paper money which flooded the country.
Furthermore, he opposed, though he could not prevent, the passage
of the bill in 1836 providing for the distribution among the states
of the surplus money which had accumulated in the Treasury since
the national debt was paid on Jan. 1, 1835. This distribution,
which was sponsored chiefly by John C. Calhoun and Henry Clay,
encouraged reckless expenditures and was a material factor in
bringing on the panic of 1837. In this matter Jackson deserves
credit which biographers and historians generally have failed to
give him.

And so in all the other political controversies of his two
turbulent administrations, he acted as he thought the people
wished. In suppressing the nullification movement in South Carolina
he lost the support of the southern aristocracy but retained the
adherence of the chief elements of his following who were intensely
nationalistic. When he refused to enforce the Supreme Court
decision protecting the Cherokee Indians from the State of Georgia
he acted in accordance with his own feeling and that of the
frontiersmen, that the best thing for the Indians was removal
beyond the Mississippi River. He did not oppose internal
improvements of a national character, but stopped the drain from
the national treasury to pay for local improvements within the
states.

HE WON AMAZING DIPLOMATIC VICTORIES

In diplomacy he achieved a record which surpassed that of such
statesmen as John Q. Adams and Henry Clay. Besides negotiating
numerous commercial treaties, he secured the opening of the West
Indies trade by negotiations with England. This matter had been
pending since the Revolution and all previous attempts to settle it
had failed. Likewise, Jackson secured a settlement of the indemnity
claims against the French Government growing out of the Napoleonic
wars, which his predecessors had tried repeatedly but
unsuccessfully to settle.

All of Jackson's policies were most bitterly assailed by his
political opponents and have been severely criticized since. But
throughout the eight years of his Presidency he met and
consistently overcame all opposition. The final triumph of his
career came in 1836, when, by his personal support, Martin Van
Buren, who was pledged to carry on his policies, was elected as his
successor.

While Masons may differ in their opinions concerning the political
questions of the Jackson administration, they all should honor and
respect him for the open stand he took for the Masonic Order during
the Anti-Masonic movement. When thousands of Masons, if they did
not openly renounce the Order, at least were afraid to defend it,
Jackson boldly proclaimed his attachment to the fraternity. Even
when the Anti-Masonic party, in 1832, placed William Wirt [see
note] in the field as a candidate for the Presidency against him,
he refused to equivocate. During his residence in Washington he was
an honorary member of Federal Lodge, No. 1. When his duties
permitted he did not hesitate to attend lodge functions and
otherwise openly show his loyalty to the Order. As an illustration
of this he wrote a letter to the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts,
during the heat of the Anti-Masonic excitement, declaring that "the
Masonic Society was an institution calculated to benefit mankind
and trusted it would continue to prosper."

After his second term as President expired in 1837, Jackson retired
to his home, the "Hermitage," near Nashville, Tenn. While he
continued until his death to maintain a keen interest in politics,
he was not able to actively participate. During his whole
Presidency his health had been bad and during his closing years his
physical condition was feeble.

Much has been said about Jackson's violent qualities but little
about the gentler side of his life. His wife had died late in 1828,
and from then to the end of his life he worshipped her memory. In
his room he kept her picture constantly before him, and each day he
would read from her Bible--something which probably most of his
detractors did not do. In 1839 he joined the Presbyterian church
and from then to the close of his life was a professing Christian.
At the "Hermitage" he was very affectionate in his relations with
the family of his adopted son who lived with him. Towards his
servants he showed kindness and consideration.

The disease which had for so long been undermining his constitution
finally overcame him, and he died on June 8, 1845. The cause of his
death was announced as dropsy and consumption. When the news spread
over the country there was almost universal mourning. So bitterly
had he been hated by political enemies that these showed little
regret at his passing. But the great majority of people sincerely
grieved at his demise. Throughout the country eulogistic addresses
were delivered, and in the larger cities, such as New York and
Washington, funeral processions were held, in which the Masonic
bodies occupied prominent positions.

The feelings of his Masonic brethren were shown in the tribute
prepared by the Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee, who said:

"The hand of the spoiler has been among us. His grasp has been laid
upon the pillars of our edifice, and one of its stately columns
lies in the dust * * The life of Andrew Jackson was a beautiful
illustration of Masonic Benevolence. In him it was an expansive, a
diffusive principle * * * The grave holds this noble jewel of
Masonry. In republican simplicity, he reposes * * * Disturb not his
slumbers, by party execrations. Let us give his foibles to
oblivion, and enshrine his virtues in our 'heart of hearts'. Whilst
a grateful people award to him their need of praise, be it ours so
to pass the level of time, as that we may greet him in the 'Holy of
Holies above."

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES

Of the many biographies of Andrew Jackson the best is Bassett, John
Spencer, The Life of Andrew Jackson, II vols. Doubleday, Page and
Co., New York, 1911. Parton, James, Life of Andrew Jackson, III
vols., Houghton, Mifflin & Co., New York, 1888, is interesting but
often not reliable. Parton accepted hearsay as fact and lacked in
critical discrimination. Other useful biographies are Brady, Cyrus
Townsend, The True Andrew Jackson, J. B. Lippincott Co.,
Philadelphia, 1906; Brown, William Garrott, Andrew Jackson (The
Riverside Biographical Series, No. I), Houghton, Mifflin Co., New
York, 1900, and Buell, Augustus C., History of Andrew Jackson.
Pioneei, Patriot, Soldier, Politician, President, II vols., Charles
Scribner's Sons, New York, 1904. There are others but those named
are best.

For general information concerning the Jackson period and Jackson
democracy there are numerous books available. Schlesinger, A. M.,
New Viewpoints in American History, The MacMillan Co., New York,
1922, contains an excellent chapter on "Jacksonian Democracy."
Other interesting books are MacDonald, William, Jacksonian
Democracy (Albert Bushnell Hart ed., The American Nation; a
History, Vol. XV), Harper and Bros., New York, 1906; Ogg, Frederic
Austin, The Reign of Andrew Jackson (Allen Johnson, ed., The
Chronicles of America Series, Vol. XX), Yale University Press, New
Haven 1919; Peck, Charles Henry, The Jacksonian Epoch, Harper and
Bros., New York, 1899; and Turner, Frederick Jackson, Rise of the
New West, 1819-1829 (Albert Bushnell Hart, ed.. The American
Nation: A History, Vol. XIV), Harper and Bros. New York, 1906.


Much information on the period 1825 to 1845 was obtained from
political newspapers of the time: the National Intelligencer, the
National Journal, the United States Telegraph; the Washington
Globe; and the Washington Union. Information concerning the
Anti-Masonic Party is contained in the Masonic Service Association
Bulletin, No. 10, and THE BUILDER March, 1921.

Information concerning Jackson's Masonic record was obtained from
The Freemason's Monthly Magazine, Vol. IV (1845), p. 349, A. B.
Andrews, "Andrew Jackson the Freemason," The New Age Magazine, Vol.
XXIX, pp. 3-6; William L. Boyden, "Andrew Jackson, Grand Master of
Masons," The New Age, June, 1904, pp. 71-73; and the Proceedings of
the Grand Lodge of Tennessee 1813-1847, pp. 77, 375, 578-579.

NOTE BY EDITOR--According to Dr. Albert G. Mackey, Mystic Tie, New
York, 1856, William Wirt, Anti-Masonic candidate for President, had
been an Entered Apprentice, and did not renounce the Order until
his nomination, even then his renouncement was equivocal and
half-hearted and, as he himself frankly acknowledged, based on
hearsay only.

