Talk:Bank War/Archives/2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Censure
Shouldn't it be mentioned that Jackson's censure was expunged, largely on the grounds that the Senate had no power to censure him. Emperor001 (talk) 03:24, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- No, it should not be mentioned. The political "war" that raged involved a censure of the President of the United States. That the censure was removed by the Senate at a later date does not add any insight into the subject at hand. It does, however, appear that a certain editor wishes to "defend" Jackson's honor. This is entirely unnecessary. If a secondary source can be provided that includes the caveat that the censure was "expunged" - within the context of the Bank War - that's another matter, and will be considered on its merits. 36hourblock (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- First, I apologize again for forgetting to check this note first and commenting on your talk page. Second, Jon Meachom states the the removal of the expunging of Jackson's censure was within the context of the Bank War. In his book, American Lion, he notes that the opposition expunging the censure was by Clay, Calhoun, and other men whom Senator Benton described as "Bank men." He also included a quotation by Senator Benton stating that the censure was a verdict that, "the Senate and the Bank pronounced upon him" and that the people demanded that the censure be expunged. The expunging of the censure falls in the context of the Bank War because it represents Clay and Calhoun attempt to hold onto the "last hurrah" they achieved in the Senate and Benton's attempt to take this "last hurrah" away. I admit to being pro-Jackson (and I apologize for any shortcomings in trying to keep my bias out), but I only seek to include a historical fact that I believe is relevant (my professor ended his lecture on the Bank War with a note that the censure was expunged). If anything it is an interesting tidbit of knowledge that many historians would include in an article or book about the topic. Emperor001 (talk) 00:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, it should not be mentioned. The political "war" that raged involved a censure of the President of the United States. That the censure was removed by the Senate at a later date does not add any insight into the subject at hand. It does, however, appear that a certain editor wishes to "defend" Jackson's honor. This is entirely unnecessary. If a secondary source can be provided that includes the caveat that the censure was "expunged" - within the context of the Bank War - that's another matter, and will be considered on its merits. 36hourblock (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Notice: The Bank War is a "tidbit" free environment. Please find another project to pursue. 36hourblock (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)