Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
September 6, 1832
Herald Of The Times
Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island
What is this article about?
An editorial from the Portsmouth Journal critiques a pro-Jackson toast from Philadelphia that supports Gen. Andrew Jackson as President 'Bank or no Bank,' interpreting it as blind loyalty that disregards the Constitution and equates to monarchical 'king can do no wrong' doctrine, warning it endangers republicanism.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
From the Portsmouth, (N. H.) Journal.
True Jacksonism.—A toast drank at Philadelphia, 'with universal acclamation of applause,' is going the rounds of the Jackson papers, as a very clever thing. It reads thus:
"Gen. Andrew Jackson—President of the United States. He will be sustained—Bank or no Bank."
This is the most satisfactory definition of Jacksonism we have ever seen. Look at it, for one moment. Does it not mean that they will vote for Jackson, whether he supports the Constitution, or destroys it? Most clearly it does. For say they, (and so says Jackson) the Bank is unconstitutional. Yet this toast drank on the 4th of July, before the President's Veto was published, or his decision known,—is "Hurra for Jackson—Bank or no Bank—Hurra for Jackson, right or wrong."
What kind of republicanism is this, to maintain the doctrine that the KING can do no wrong?
If so profligate a sentiment as the above can be swallowed up by a majority of the people, we may indeed preserve the name and form of a republic, but it will be the name and form only.
If the people are willing to sell themselves into such mental slavery, they will soon find masters.
True Jacksonism.—A toast drank at Philadelphia, 'with universal acclamation of applause,' is going the rounds of the Jackson papers, as a very clever thing. It reads thus:
"Gen. Andrew Jackson—President of the United States. He will be sustained—Bank or no Bank."
This is the most satisfactory definition of Jacksonism we have ever seen. Look at it, for one moment. Does it not mean that they will vote for Jackson, whether he supports the Constitution, or destroys it? Most clearly it does. For say they, (and so says Jackson) the Bank is unconstitutional. Yet this toast drank on the 4th of July, before the President's Veto was published, or his decision known,—is "Hurra for Jackson—Bank or no Bank—Hurra for Jackson, right or wrong."
What kind of republicanism is this, to maintain the doctrine that the KING can do no wrong?
If so profligate a sentiment as the above can be swallowed up by a majority of the people, we may indeed preserve the name and form of a republic, but it will be the name and form only.
If the people are willing to sell themselves into such mental slavery, they will soon find masters.
What sub-type of article is it?
Partisan Politics
Constitutional
Economic Policy
What keywords are associated?
Jacksonism
Andrew Jackson
Bank Veto
Partisan Loyalty
Republicanism
Constitutional Bank
Political Toast
What entities or persons were involved?
Andrew Jackson
Jackson Papers
Bank Of The United States
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Critique Of Blind Loyalty To Andrew Jackson Over The Bank
Stance / Tone
Strongly Critical Of Jacksonism As Anti Republican
Key Figures
Andrew Jackson
Jackson Papers
Bank Of The United States
Key Arguments
The Toast Supports Jackson Regardless Of The Bank's Fate, Implying Endorsement Even If He Violates The Constitution.
Jackson And Supporters Claim The Bank Is Unconstitutional.
The Toast, Given Before The Veto, Equates To 'Hurra For Jackson, Right Or Wrong.'
Such Loyalty Mirrors The Monarchical Doctrine That The King Can Do No Wrong.
Blind Acceptance Of This Sentiment Risks Turning The Republic Into Mere Form Without Substance.
People Embracing Mental Slavery Will Invite Masters.