The opposition which brought the bank to an untimely end was largely inspired by political intrigue and by selfish jealousy on the part of the state banks. The charges of Jackson and other critics were that some of its officers who were incompetent were retained in office by political influence, that it tried to influence political elections and state legislation, and that some of the branches were established for political effect. It was further alleged that the bank was monopolistic and undemocratic in character and therefore dangerous to our institutions. On other grounds it was argued that the bank was unconstitutional. Some of its banking operations were held to be objectionable and violations of its charter, such, for instance, as the use of branch drafts, the practice of usury in exchange dealings, the sale of coin, trading in public securities, speculation in real estate, and the like. The aggressive and peculiar character of the Democratic President, with his large political following from the West and South, really explains why the inconsequential charges brought against so serviceable and successful an institution led to its dissolution.