Thomas Hart Benton's Remarks to the Senate on the Expunging Resolution

In Short

This address serves as the culmination of a three-year legislative crusade to remove a formal Senate censure against President Andrew Jackson. Delivered as Jackson’s presidency neared its end, the speech is a defense of the executive branch’s role in American democracy and a fierce indictment of the Bank of the United States. It captures a pivotal moment of political transition in the nineteenth century, illustrating how the intense, vitriolic conflicts of the Jacksonian era were debated, framed, and ultimately resolved through the lens of popular will.

The Story

The narrative begins with a resolute senator standing before the chamber to fulfill a promise made three years prior: the expunging of a formal resolution that had condemned President Andrew Jackson. The orator frames this act not as a matter of personal opinion, but as the inevitable conclusion to a national mandate. He argues that the public, through state instructions, congressional elections, and the decisive outcome of the recent presidential race, has clearly vindicated Jackson against the charges once levied against him by the Senate. The Bank of the United States, which he identifies as the primary engine of the initial condemnation, is now portrayed as a defeated force, its influence withered by the very public outcry it once sought to manipulate.

Having established the mandate, the speaker pivots to a broader defense of Jackson’s entire administration. He acknowledges the "appalling predictions of ruin and woe" that characterized his opponents' rhetoric, noting that Jackson had been labeled a tyrant, a usurper, and a destroyer of industry. Yet, as the president prepares to leave office, the speaker contrasts those dire warnings with the reality of the country's state. He highlights a series of diplomatic successes, noting that the administration secured indemnities from France, Spain, Portugal, and Naples for long-standing grievances, effectively settling debts that previous administrations had failed to address. He even invokes a specific, violent episode in Sumatra to demonstrate that Jackson’s resolve extended to the protection of American citizens abroad, projecting a image of the nation as a formidable and respected power.

The argument then moves into the realm of constitutional theory. The orator defends Jackson’s frequent use of the presidential veto, reframing it from an act of "kingly prerogative" into a necessary, democratic tool that forces a "recommitment" of legislation to the people themselves. By vetoing the renewal of the Bank’s charter, he argues that Jackson prevented the nation from being "bestrode by the monster" of a private, unaccountable moneyed corporation.

The address concludes on a reflective note, acknowledging that the full history of the Jacksonian era cannot be written by its contemporaries. The speaker insists that the passions of the day must cool before future chroniclers—the next generation’s historians—can accurately measure the magnitude of the epoch. With the task of defense complete, he declares himself a mere instrument of the public will. He calls for the Senate to execute the "edict of the people" and physically strike the censuring resolution from the official journal, closing the chapter on the contest that has defined his political life.

How It Unfolds

The opening challenge The speaker asserts that the motion to expunge is not a personal whim but a direct response to the expressed will of the American people. He cites the results of recent elections and the decline of the Bank of the United States as undeniable proof that the public has rejected the Senate's original condemnation.

The shift to legacy Moving beyond the narrow question of the resolution, the orator provides a sweeping review of the Jackson administration. He systematically compares the dire predictions of "tyranny" made by political rivals against the actual record of international peace and financial settlement achieved during those years.

The defense of the veto He pivots to constitutional philosophy, presenting the presidential veto as a democratic safeguard rather than an abuse of power. By framing the veto as a temporary delay that allows for popular consideration, he justifies Jackson’s conflict with Congress over the national bank.

The final demand The speech reaches its climax as the orator disclaims personal credit for the movement, positioning himself as a vehicle for the masses. He demands the immediate physical expurgation of the journal, signaling the end of the conflict and the transition of Jackson into the realm of history.

The People

Andrew Jackson stands at the center of the narrative as the "patriot President," a figure who embodies the shift from a contested political actor to a historical icon. He is depicted as a man of immense moral courage who faced down the "moneyed power" of the Bank of the United States to protect the interests of the common citizen.

Thomas Hart Benton, the speaker, acts as the persistent, solitary voice who initiated the movement against the Senate’s censure. He presents himself as a man of iron conviction who braved the "jeers and taunts" of his opponents for three years. He remains entirely loyal to Jackson, viewing his own legislative career as inextricably tied to the success of the President’s agenda.

The Senators and political opponents are characterized collectively as a "slender phalanx" of defeated rivals who once wielded the power of the Bank to manipulate public opinion. Having once painted Jackson as a tyrant and an imbecile, they are now depicted as having been proven wrong by the sober judgment of the electorate.

The American People emerge as the ultimate authority in the text. The orator treats them as a "competent and ultimate tribunal" whose verdict at the ballot box supersedes any legislative action taken within the Senate chamber. Their will is the force that ultimately propels the expunging resolution to its conclusion.

In Its Own Voice

"It was not a vain boast, or an idle assumption, but was the result of a deep conviction of the injustice done President Jackson, and a thorough reliance upon the justice of the American people."

The speaker explains his long-held confidence that the Senate's formal censure of the President would eventually be reversed.

"The total list of arrearages, extending through four successive previous administrations, has been closed and settled up."

The orator underscores the success of the Jackson administration in securing financial indemnities from foreign powers.

"Solitary and alone, and amid the jeers and taunts of my opponents, I put this ball in motion."

The speaker reflects on the lonely start of his three-year journey to remove the resolution from the Senate’s record.

What It's Really About

At its core, this work is an argument for the supremacy of the popular will over the formal procedures of government. It explores the tension between an activist, populist executive and the traditional legislative checks of the Senate. The text raises fundamental questions about the role of the President as the primary representative of the people, and whether a legislature can ever truly bind the hands of a chief executive if that executive retains a strong base of public support. It is a document about political legitimacy, the power of rhetoric in shaping historical memory, and the belief that time and the "sovereign people" are the final arbiters of political truth, rather than the temporary actions of government institutions.

Why Read It Today

Reading this speech offers a rare, unfiltered look at the raw intensity of nineteenth-century political combat. Readers will find a masterclass in the art of the rhetorical "counter-narrative," as the orator works to dismantle a long-standing political attack by reframing it as a betrayal of democratic principles.

Those interested in the evolution of American political rhetoric will appreciate the high-minded, almost epic cadence of the language, which treats a legislative procedural vote as a matter of cosmic significance. However, the modern reader should be prepared for the dense, flowery prose typical of the period, as well as the deeply partisan atmosphere. The text reflects the strong, often binary, political loyalties of the 1830s, which can feel unfamiliar to a contemporary audience accustomed to different styles of debate.

What lingers after reading is the speaker's profound belief in the power of the public to act as a corrective force. Whether one agrees with the defense of Jackson or not, the speech serves as a vivid reminder of how intensely Americans have always felt about the nature of presidential power and the integrity of their government’s official records. It is a compelling relic of a time when the Senate floor served as the primary, high-stakes theater of the nation’s deepest ideological divides.