Donald Trump would come to the defense of Andrew Jackson, wouldn’t he? One blustery populist looking out for another. When it was announced last week that Harriet Tubman will replace Old Hickory on the $20 bill, Trump allowed that “Tubman is fantastic,” then denigrated her choice as “pure political correctness” and defended Jackson as having “had a great history,” a history “of tremendous success for the country.” What were the highlights of that history? Let’s turn to The Weekly Standard’s Jay Cost:
Cost was making the case, early last summer, for the decision that the Obama administration has now, rather miraculously, made (“Leave Hamilton Alone!” June 18, 2015). Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, in June 2015, had floated the idea of removing the admirable Alexander Hamilton from the $10 bill and replacing him with a person of the female gender to be determined.
The Weekly Standard published not only Cost’s response suggesting Jackson be given the boot, but that of Stanford professor Michael W. McConnell (“Alexander the Great: Leave Hamilton on the $10 bill,” July 20, 2015). He said of those on America’s currency, “Other than Washington and Lincoln, our most important and admired presidents, Hamilton is the worthiest and most appropriate person to honor in this way.” As “architect of our financial system,” Hamilton “belongs on a bill.”
At the time this magazine was defending Hamilton’s pride of place, America’s first Treasury secretary was not the pop-culture fave he has since become. It was later last summer that Hamilton the musical became a Broadway sensation, one as improbable as Hamilton’s own life. The Scrapbook suspects that Hamilton has been retained on the tenner less for his undeniable merits than for his newfound celebrity. But even if the administration’s reasoning smacks of Kardashianism, the decision was the correct one.
Let us also praise the excellent choice of Harriet Tubman as the woman to replace the dead white male on the twenty. Jackson of course was a champion of America’s original sin—one of the reasons McConnell cited last summer in The Weekly Standard for giving him the heave-ho: “Not only did he defend slavery where it existed, but he supported the spread of slavery to the territories. He publicly called opponents of slavery ‘monsters.’ ” How perfect to replace Jackson with one of the greatest American opponents of slavery, a hero who armed herself (at times with pistol, at times with rifle) and then, with a price on her head, repeatedly put her life at risk rescuing slaves from bondage. Not only does she represent an antidote to Jackson, Tubman is admired for accomplishments that have nothing to do with her gender. She is a hero who happened to be a woman, not a hero for having been a woman.
As if those weren’t already reasons enough, we can also celebrate the demise of one of the least pleasing likenesses ever to grace American currency. Jackson’s engraved portrait (aside from a truly spectacular head of hair) made him look bewildered, if not downright deranged. Perhaps the artist was just doing his best to capture the essence of the man. But good riddance to Crazy-Eyes Jackson.
And as for Trump, though he is disappointed in the decision regarding the twenty, perhaps there may yet be an opportunity to offer him consolation. If ever there were a perfect candidate for a three-dollar bill, he’s the man.
