Andrew Jackson – 7th President of the US

Andrew Jackson was the 7th President of the United States. He served as President from March 4, 1829, to March 4, 1837. Jackson was born on March 15, 1767, in Waxhaws, a region located on the border between North Carolina and South Carolina. He was an influential figure in American politics and is often regarded as one of the most significant and controversial Presidents in the nation’s history.

During his presidency, Jackson championed the interests of the common people and was known as a strong advocate for democracy. He was a prominent supporter of expanding suffrage and eliminating property requirements for voting. Jackson’s political ideology became known as Jacksonian Democracy, which sought to empower the common man and reduce the influence of wealthy elites in government.

One of Jackson’s most significant actions as President was his opposition to the Second Bank of the United States. He vetoed the rechartering of the bank, arguing that it was an unconstitutional and corrupt institution that benefited the wealthy at the expense of the average citizen. Jackson’s opposition to the bank and his subsequent policies contributed to a financial crisis known as the Panic of 1837.

Another defining aspect of Jackson’s presidency was his stance on Native American removal. He signed the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which authorized the forced relocation of Native American tribes living in the southeastern United States to lands west of the Mississippi River. This policy resulted in the infamous Trail of Tears, a forced march during which thousands of Native Americans died.

Early life

Andrew Jackson was born on March 15, 1767, in the Waxhaws region, which was located on the border between North Carolina and South Carolina. However, there is some dispute over his exact birthplace, with some sources suggesting he was born in South Carolina and others claiming North Carolina. Regardless, Jackson spent his formative years in the Waxhaws area.

His parents were Scots-Irish immigrants. His father, Andrew Jackson Sr., died shortly before his birth, leaving his mother, Elizabeth Hutchinson Jackson, to raise him and his two older brothers. Tragically, Jackson’s mother died of cholera during the Revolutionary War when he was just 14 years old. These early experiences of loss and hardship shaped his character and instilled in him a sense of self-reliance and resilience.

Following his mother’s death, Jackson lived with various relatives and neighbors while receiving sporadic education. He studied law in Salisbury, North Carolina, and was admitted to the bar in 1787. He then moved to Tennessee, which was still a frontier region at the time, and began practicing law in the small settlement of Nashville.

In Tennessee, Jackson quickly established himself as a successful lawyer and became involved in local politics. He served as a prosecuting attorney, a member of the Tennessee Constitutional Convention, and later as Tennessee’s first representative in the U.S. House of Representatives. In 1796, he was elected as Tennessee’s first U.S. Senator.

Jackson’s military career also began to take shape during this time. He became a colonel in the Tennessee militia and gained prominence for his leadership during the Creek War and the War of 1812. His most famous military victory came in the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, where he led American forces to a decisive victory against the British.

These early experiences in the rough frontier of Tennessee, his rise in politics, and his military achievements propelled Jackson’s reputation and laid the foundation for his eventual entry into national politics as the 7th President of the United States. His upbringing on the borderlands and his experiences as a self-made man played a significant role in shaping his personality and political ideology.


Andrew Jackson’s education was limited and informal due to the circumstances of his early life. He grew up in a rural frontier area, where formal schools were scarce and education was not easily accessible.

Jackson received his early education from local tutors and schools in the Waxhaws region. However, the quality and extent of his formal schooling were limited. His education primarily focused on basic reading, writing, and arithmetic skills.

Tragically, Jackson’s education was further disrupted by the events surrounding the American Revolutionary War. His father died just before his birth, and his mother, Elizabeth Hutchinson Jackson, died when he was 14 years old. This forced Jackson to rely on the support and care of extended family members and neighbors, often leading to interruptions in his education.

Jackson was known for his intellectual curiosity and determination to learn despite these challenges. He supplemented his formal education by reading extensively on various subjects, including law, politics, history, and military strategy. Jackson was largely self-taught, and his thirst for knowledge helped him compensate for any gaps in his formal education.

It is worth noting that Jackson’s lack of formal education became a subject of criticism and mockery during his political career. However, he demonstrated intelligence, shrewdness, and adaptability throughout his life, which contributed to his success as a lawyer, military leader, and eventually as President of the United States.

In summary, Andrew Jackson’s education was limited and received through local schools and tutors in the frontier region where he grew up. Despite this, his determination, self-guided reading, and practical experiences helped shape his intellect and prepared him for his future endeavors.

Populist Agenda

Jackson’s presidency was marked by a populist agenda to empower the common people. He believed that political power should not be concentrated in the hands of a wealthy elite but should be accessible to all citizens. This belief drove his policies and decisions throughout his time in office.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency was indeed characterized by a strong populist agenda. He sought to challenge the established political order, which he perceived as being dominated by wealthy elites and special interests. Jackson believed that government should serve the interests of the common people and ensure equal opportunities for all.

One of the key elements of Jackson’s populist agenda was his emphasis on expanding suffrage and making the political system more accessible to ordinary citizens. At the time, voting rights in the United States were often restricted to white male property owners. Jackson argued that property qualifications for voting disenfranchised a significant portion of the population and limited true democratic representation. He advocated for broader suffrage and the removal of property requirements, believing that every white male should have the right to vote.

Jackson’s commitment to expanding suffrage was reflected in the policies he pursued. For example, during his presidency, several states moved to eliminate property qualifications for voting and extended suffrage to a larger number of white males. Jackson celebrated these developments and saw them as progress towards a more inclusive democracy.

Another aspect of Jackson’s populist agenda was his hostility towards privileged elites, particularly those associated with banking and financial institutions. He viewed the Second Bank of the United States as a symbol of concentrated economic power and argued that it served the interests of a wealthy few rather than the broader population. Jackson vetoed the recharter of the bank, effectively ending its existence as a federal institution.

In his fight against the Second Bank, Jackson framed the struggle as one between the common people and the banking elites. He positioned himself as a champion of the common man, fighting against what he saw as economic tyranny. His opposition to the bank resonated with many Americans who had grievances against the financial system and felt left behind by the economic policies of the time.

Jackson’s populist agenda also found expression in his approach to government appointments and the spoils system. He believed in rewarding his political supporters and loyalists with government positions, even if it meant displacing established officeholders. This practice was seen as a way to dismantle entrenched power structures and give ordinary citizens a chance to participate in government.

However, it is worth noting that Jackson’s populist agenda had its limitations. While he aimed to empower the common people, his vision of democracy primarily focused on white males and excluded women, Native Americans, and enslaved African Americans from the political process. His support for westward expansion also came at the expense of Native American rights and led to the forced removal and suffering of Indigenous communities.

In summary, Andrew Jackson’s populist agenda aimed to empower the common people and challenge the influence of wealthy elites. His efforts to expand suffrage, dismantle the Second Bank of the United States, and implement the spoils system reflected his belief in a more inclusive and participatory democracy. However, the limitations of his agenda and the consequences of his policies remain subjects of debate and criticism.

Spoils System

Jackson implemented the spoils system, which involved appointing supporters and loyalists to government positions to reward political loyalty. This practice led to significant turnover in government positions and was criticized for promoting patronage over meritocracy.

The spoils system, also known as the patronage system, was a significant aspect of Andrew Jackson’s presidency. It involved the practice of appointing individuals to government positions based on their political support and loyalty rather than their qualifications or merit. Under the spoils system, Jackson sought to reward his political allies and supporters with government jobs as a way to maintain their loyalty and strengthen his political base.

The spoils system had a profound impact on the makeup of the federal government during Jackson’s presidency. It resulted in a significant turnover of officeholders, as Jackson replaced many existing government officials with his own appointees. This sweeping change in personnel allowed Jackson to surround himself with loyalists who shared his political views and goals.

The spoils system had both advantages and disadvantages. Proponents argued that it promoted political engagement and participation by offering government positions as incentives for citizens to support the ruling party. It was seen as a way to ensure that those in power had a reliable network of supporters who would help implement their policies and advance their political agenda.

However, the spoils system also faced criticism for several reasons. One of the main concerns was that it undermined the principles of meritocracy and competence in government. Critics argued that appointments based on political loyalty rather than qualifications could result in unqualified or inexperienced individuals holding important positions. This raised concerns about the efficiency and effectiveness of the government.

Additionally, the spoils system fostered a culture of corruption and favoritism. The pursuit of political patronage and the desire for government positions led to intense competition and sometimes unethical practices. The exchange of favors and political influence for government jobs created opportunities for abuse and nepotism.

Over time, the negative consequences of the spoils system became increasingly apparent. The practice came to be seen as a barrier to good governance and led to calls for civil service reform. Efforts were made in subsequent years to introduce merit-based systems for government appointments, where qualifications and competency were given greater weight.

Despite the criticism and eventual reforms, the spoils system had a lasting impact on American politics. It shaped the relationship between political parties and government positions, and its influence extended beyond Jackson’s presidency. The spoils system became a hallmark of the broader system of American political patronage, influencing political dynamics well into the 19th century.

In summary, the spoils system implemented by Andrew Jackson involved appointing political allies and supporters to government positions based on their loyalty rather than their qualifications. While it aimed to reward and maintain political support, the spoils system faced criticism for undermining meritocracy and promoting corruption. The practice eventually led to calls for reform and the establishment of merit-based civil service systems.

Nullification Crisis

During Jackson’s presidency, a major constitutional crisis known as the Nullification Crisis emerged. South Carolina, led by Vice President John C. Calhoun, declared that it had the right to nullify federal laws it deemed unconstitutional. Jackson vehemently opposed this assertion and threatened to use military force to enforce federal law. The crisis was ultimately resolved through a compromise, but it highlighted the ongoing tensions between state and federal authorities.

The Nullification Crisis of the 1830s was a pivotal event during Andrew Jackson’s presidency that tested the balance of power between the federal government and the states. The crisis was sparked by the issue of protective tariffs, which had been a subject of contention between the North and the South.

South Carolina, led by its prominent statesman John C. Calhoun, argued that the federal tariffs imposed on imported goods were unconstitutional and harmful to the state’s economy, particularly its agricultural interests. Calhoun asserted the doctrine of nullification, which claimed that states had the right to nullify or invalidate federal laws they deemed unconstitutional within their borders.

Jackson firmly rejected the notion of nullification and viewed it as a threat to the authority of the federal government. In his view, the Constitution vested the power to interpret and enforce laws with the federal government, not individual states. He famously responded to the nullification threat by declaring, “Our Federal Union: It must be preserved!” and by asserting that nullification was a dangerous doctrine that could lead to the dissolution of the United States.

To address the crisis, Jackson urged Congress to pass the Force Bill in 1833, which authorized the president to use military force to ensure the enforcement of federal law. This bill was seen as a strong statement of federal authority and a warning to South Carolina. However, in an effort to defuse tensions and prevent armed conflict, a compromise tariff bill known as the Tariff of 1833 was simultaneously passed. It gradually reduced the tariffs over time, addressing some of South Carolina’s concerns.

The compromise tariff helped alleviate the immediate crisis, and South Carolina subsequently repealed its nullification ordinance. The Nullification Crisis marked a victory for Jackson and the federal government, as it reaffirmed the supremacy of federal law over state laws and resolved the immediate threat of secession.

However, the Nullification Crisis also underscored the deep divisions between the North and the South, particularly over economic and political issues. The debate over states’ rights, the balance of power between the federal government and the states, and the issue of tariffs would continue to simmer and contribute to the tensions that eventually led to the American Civil War.

The Nullification Crisis highlighted the ongoing struggle to define the relationship between the federal government and the states. Jackson’s firm stance against nullification helped solidify the principle of federal supremacy, but the underlying tensions over states’ rights and regional differences persisted in American politics and would shape the course of the nation’s history.

Expansion of Presidential Power

Jackson expanded the powers of the presidency during his tenure. He believed in a strong executive branch and often exercised his veto power to block legislation he viewed as unconstitutional or harmful to the interests of the common people. His aggressive use of the veto made him the first president to exercise significant influence over legislative matters.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency indeed witnessed an expansion of presidential power, as he sought to assert the authority and influence of the executive branch. He believed in a robust presidency that could effectively represent and protect the interests of the American people, particularly those he considered to be part of the common man.

One of the most prominent displays of Jackson’s expansion of presidential power was his aggressive use of the veto. Jackson employed his veto power more than any of his predecessors, exercising it 12 times during his two terms in office. He utilized the veto to block legislation that he deemed unconstitutional or detrimental to the interests of the nation or the common people. Jackson justified his vetoes as acts of defending the Constitution and preventing the concentration of power in the hands of specific interest groups or Congress itself.

The significance of Jackson’s use of the veto power extended beyond its frequency. He transformed the veto from a limited check on legislation to a proactive tool of presidential policy-making. Jackson used the veto to shape legislation according to his own vision and priorities, effectively influencing the course of congressional decision-making. His aggressive approach to vetoing bills made him the first president to wield such significant influence over legislative matters.

Moreover, Jackson’s expansion of presidential power went beyond the veto. He also sought to exercise influence over the federal bureaucracy and the appointment of government officials. He aimed to surround himself with loyalists and supporters who would carry out his policies. Jackson believed that he had a mandate from the people and that he should have the authority to shape the government according to his interpretation of their interests.

This expansion of presidential power during Jackson’s presidency sparked debates and controversies. Critics accused him of executive overreach and of exceeding the constitutional limits of presidential authority. They argued that his actions threatened the separation of powers and undermined the checks and balances inherent in the U.S. government system.

However, Jackson’s expansion of presidential power also had lasting implications. It set a precedent for subsequent presidents, who often sought to exercise a more assertive and influential role in shaping policy and challenging congressional authority. Jackson’s actions established the presidency as a central force in American governance and contributed to the evolution of the modern presidency with its increased executive power.

In summary, Andrew Jackson’s presidency witnessed an expansion of presidential power, particularly through his aggressive use of the veto and his pursuit of an influential executive branch. His actions shaped the presidency’s role in the U.S. government, influencing subsequent presidents and contributing to the development of a stronger, more assertive executive branch.

Westward Expansion and Indian Removal

Jackson was a strong advocate of westward expansion and played a key role in the forced relocation of Native American tribes from their ancestral lands. The Indian Removal Act of 1830, which he signed into law, resulted in the displacement and suffering of numerous Native American tribes, most notably the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw, and Seminole. The forced removal of these tribes to designated Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) became known as the Trail of Tears due to the harsh conditions and loss of life endured by the Native Americans along the journey.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency was marked by his staunch support for westward expansion and his controversial policies regarding Native American tribes. He believed in the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, the belief that it was the destiny and duty of the United States to expand its territory across the North American continent. Jackson saw westward expansion as vital for the growth and prosperity of the nation.

One of the most significant and controversial actions taken by Jackson was the signing of the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This act provided for the forced relocation of Native American tribes from their ancestral lands in the southeastern United States to designated Indian Territory in present-day Oklahoma. The primary goal of the act was to clear valuable land for white settlement and to open it up for economic development, particularly in the form of agriculture and cotton production.

The Indian Removal Act led to the displacement and suffering of thousands of Native Americans. The most well-known and tragic episode resulting from this policy was the Trail of Tears. The Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw, and Seminole tribes were among those forcibly removed from their lands. The journey westward, often on foot and under harsh conditions, resulted in the deaths of thousands of Native Americans due to disease, starvation, and exposure.

The Trail of Tears has come to symbolize the tragic consequences of Jackson’s Indian removal policies. It remains a dark chapter in American history and is seen as a gross violation of the rights and sovereignty of Native American tribes. The forced removal disrupted communities destroyed cultural heritage, and caused immense suffering and loss of life.

Jackson’s policies towards Native Americans reflected his belief in the superiority of white settlers and his disregard for the rights and autonomy of indigenous peoples. He viewed Native Americans as obstacles to progress and sought to remove them from lands desired by white settlers. These policies were also driven by economic interests, as the fertile lands inhabited by Native American tribes held significant agricultural and economic potential.

It is important to note that not all Native American tribes were forcibly removed during Jackson’s presidency. Some tribes, such as the Cherokee, pursued legal means to resist removal, resulting in significant legal battles and debates over tribal sovereignty and the rights of indigenous peoples.

The policies and actions associated with westward expansion and Indian removal during Jackson’s presidency have been widely criticized. They are recognized as significant violations of human rights and have had enduring effects on Native American communities, land rights, and cultural heritage. The legacy of this period continues to shape discussions and efforts toward reconciliation and the recognition of Native American rights and sovereignty in the United States.

Banking and Economic Policies

Jackson was a staunch opponent of the Second Bank of the United States, which he believed had too much influence over the nation’s economy and served the interests of the wealthy elite. He vetoed the bank’s recharter, leading to the withdrawal of federal funds from the institution. This move contributed to the eventual collapse of the bank and sparked debates over the role of centralized banking in the United States.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency witnessed a fierce battle over the role and influence of the Second Bank of the United States. Jackson, motivated by his populist ideology and his suspicion of concentrated power, emerged as a staunch opponent of the bank.

The Second Bank of the United States was established in 1816 as a national bank intended to stabilize the country’s financial system. However, Jackson viewed it as a tool that served the interests of the wealthy elite and undermined the principles of democratic governance. He believed that the bank favored a privileged few and wielded excessive control over the nation’s economy.

In 1832, a few years before the bank’s charter was set to expire, Congress passed a bill to recharter the bank. Jackson vetoed the bill, delivering a powerful rebuke to the institution. In his veto message, Jackson argued that the bank concentrated too much power in the hands of a few private individuals and violated the principles of economic fairness and democratic representation.

Jackson’s veto ignited a fierce political and economic debate. Supporters of the bank, led by prominent statesman Henry Clay, criticized Jackson’s actions and argued for the bank’s recharter. They contended that the bank played a vital role in stabilizing the economy, regulating the money supply, and facilitating economic growth.

Jackson, however, remained resolute in his opposition. He ordered the withdrawal of federal deposits from the bank, moving them to various state banks or “pet banks” that were seen as more aligned with his populist vision. This move severely weakened the bank and limited its ability to control the nation’s finances.

The withdrawal of federal funds and the subsequent loss of credibility contributed to the eventual collapse of the Second Bank of the United States. The demise of the bank marked a victory for Jackson and his supporters, who saw it as a triumph against the entrenched power of financial institutions.

Jackson’s actions regarding the bank sparked enduring debates over the role of centralized banking in the United States. Supporters of Jackson’s stance praised his efforts to curtail the influence of the financial elite and promote a more democratic economy. Critics, on the other hand, expressed concerns about the lack of a centralized regulatory institution and the potential for economic instability in the absence of a national bank.

The consequences of Jackson’s banking policies extended beyond his presidency. The demise of the Second Bank of the United States led to a period of financial instability and contributed to the economic downturn known as the Panic of 1837. The nation would continue to grapple with questions surrounding banking and monetary policy in the years that followed.

In summary, Andrew Jackson’s presidency witnessed his strong opposition to the Second Bank of the United States, driven by his belief that it served the interests of the wealthy elite. Jackson’s veto of the bank’s recharter, followed by the withdrawal of federal funds, marked a significant shift in economic policy and contributed to the eventual collapse of the bank. The debates sparked by Jackson’s actions continue to shape discussions about the role of centralized banking and the balance between democratic ideals and economic stability in the United States.

Legacy and Historical Interpretation

Andrew Jackson’s presidency has elicited mixed opinions and interpretations. Supporters laud his championing of the common man and his efforts to expand democracy, while critics highlight his treatment of Native Americans and his disregard for the rights of marginalized communities. His impact on American politics and the presidency is undeniable, as his style of populist leadership and his expansion of executive authority set precedents for future presidents.

It’s important to note that Andrew Jackson’s presidency occurred during a time of profound transformation in the United States, and his policies and actions reflected the complexities and controversies of that era.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency has indeed elicited a range of opinions and interpretations, reflecting the complexities and controversies of his time. His legacy is a subject of ongoing historical debate, as his policies and actions continue to be evaluated from different perspectives.

Supporters of Andrew Jackson praise his championing of the common man and his efforts to expand democracy. They highlight his advocacy for broader suffrage, his populist rhetoric, and his attempts to challenge established political elites. Jackson’s presidency marked a shift towards a more inclusive democracy, as he sought to empower the working class and reduce the influence of the wealthy elite. His expansion of executive power and assertive use of the veto is often seen as a reflection of his commitment to the interests of the people.

However, critics point to the darker aspects of Jackson’s legacy. One of the most significant criticisms centers on his treatment of Native Americans. The forced removal of Native American tribes through policies such as the Indian Removal Act and the Trail of Tears resulted in immense suffering, loss of life, and the violation of indigenous rights. These actions are viewed as egregious violations of human rights and are often condemned as a stain on Jackson’s presidency.

Jackson’s views and actions concerning slavery also draw criticism. While he was a slave owner himself, he was also a proponent of states’ rights, which allowed for the perpetuation of the institution of slavery in some regions. His stance on slavery and his enforcement of federal authority in relation to nullification are seen by some as contradictory and inconsistent.

Furthermore, Jackson’s expansion of presidential power and his use of executive authority have raised concerns about the potential for abuses of power and threats to the system of checks and balances. Some argue that his strong presidency set a precedent for future leaders to consolidate power at the expense of other branches of government and erode democratic principles.

In recent years, there has been increased scrutiny of Jackson’s presidency and a reassessment of his historical significance. Efforts have been made to reevaluate his role as a symbol of American democracy in light of his controversial policies and actions. Calls to remove Jackson’s image from currency and monuments reflect the ongoing reexamination of his legacy.

In conclusion, Andrew Jackson’s presidency evokes mixed opinions and interpretations. While he is celebrated by some for his advocacy for the common man and expansion of democracy, his treatment of Native Americans and his expansion of executive power remain points of criticism. As with many historical figures, the assessment of Jackson’s legacy continues to evolve as new perspectives and historical understandings emerge.

Marriage and Family

Andrew Jackson had a complex personal life that involved marriage, family, and significant losses. Let’s explore the key aspects of his relationships and family history:

Marriage to Rachel Donelson Robards: In 1791, Jackson married Rachel Donelson Robards. However, their marriage was mired in controversy. Initially, Jackson believed Rachel was divorced from her first husband, Lewis Robards, but it was later revealed that the divorce proceedings had not been finalized when they married. This led to accusations of adultery and caused strain on their relationship. Eventually, Rachel obtained a legal divorce from Robards, and she and Jackson remarried in 1794.

Rachel’s Death and Impact: Rachel Jackson’s reputation suffered due to the controversy surrounding her previous marriage. During Jackson’s presidential campaigns in 1824 and 1828, his opponents used the scandal against him. Tragically, Rachel passed away on December 22, 1828, shortly after his election victory but before his inauguration. Her death deeply affected Jackson, and he blamed the attacks on her character for her declining health.

Adoption of Nephews: Andrew Jackson and Rachel did not have any children of their own. However, they adopted and raised two of Rachel’s nephews, Andrew Jackson Jr. and Lyncoya Jackson. Lyncoya, a Native American child whom Jackson had encountered during the Creek War, was taken in and cared for by the couple.

Extended Family: Jackson had a large extended family, and several of his relatives played significant roles in his life and administration. His brothers, Hugh and Robert, served as trusted advisors and supporters throughout his career. His nephew, Andrew Jackson Donelson, served as his private secretary and later as U.S. Minister to Prussia during Jackson’s presidency.

Legacy and Descendants: Andrew Jackson’s descendants continued to make their mark on American history. Andrew Jackson Jr. served in various political positions, and his son, Samuel Jackson, was a Confederate officer during the Civil War. Jackson’s great-nephew, Theodore Roosevelt Jr., went on to become the 26th President of the United States.

While Jackson’s marriage to Rachel was marred by controversy and her untimely death deeply impacted him, his extended family played a significant role in his personal life and political career. Their support, advice, and influence were instrumental in shaping his decisions and policies throughout his life.


Andrew Jackson’s presidency left a lasting impact on American politics and society. While he is celebrated for his defense of the common man and expanding democratic principles, his policies toward Native Americans and his views on slavery have been criticized. Jackson’s presidency remains a topic of historical debate and analysis to this day.

Andrew Jackson’s presidency evokes mixed opinions and interpretations. Supporters commend his championing of the common man and efforts to expand democracy, while critics condemn his treatment of Native Americans and his expansion of executive power. His legacy reflects the complexities and controversies of his time, with ongoing debates surrounding his policies and actions. While he is praised for empowering the working class and challenging political elites, his forced removal of Native American tribes and consolidation of presidential authority draw significant criticism. The assessment of Jackson’s presidency continues to evolve as historical perspectives and understandings shift.

Frequently Asked Questions

Read also:

John Quincy Adams – 6th President of the US

James Monroe – 5th President of the US

James Madison – 4th President of the US

Thomas Jefferson – 3rd President of the US

John Adams – 2nd President of the US

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get Fully Funded Scholarships

Free Visa, Free Scholarship Abroad

           Click Here to Apply