Key concepts for L3 2008-2009
▼ Many of the following concepts have been borrowed from
• Peter B. Knupfer, The Union as it is: Constitutional Unionism and Sectional Compromise, 17871861 (Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1991).
▼ Compromise n.
▼ The Pocket Oxford Dictionary of Current English, © Oxford University Press 1996
• 1 settlement of a dispute by mutual concession. 2 (often foll. by between) intermediate state between conflicting opinions, actions, etc.
• v. (-sing) 1 a settle a dispute by mutual concession. b modify one's opinions, demands, etc. 2 bring into disrepute or danger by indiscretion.
▼ compromise (Knupfer 5)
• A compromise is the settlement of a conflict through mutual concessions. Other definitions offer variations on this one, modifying certain terms-using diplomatic adjustment in place of sterile settlement, for instance. Some definitions stray from description to prescription, conflating compromise with consensus or amputating the quality of mutuality by sermonizing about making compromises “with reality.“ Compromise is not consensus, and reality never makes compromises but only demands concessions. To avoid the common confusion of compromise with other forms of conflict resolution, we need to delineate its component elements-conflict, concession, mutuality, and settlement-and explain their unique relationship to one another.
▼ Enlightenment
▼ Locke (1632-1704)
• English philosopher who was an initiator of the Enlightenment in England and France, an inspirer of the U.S. Constitution, and the author of, among other works, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, his account of human knowledge, including the “new science“ of his day, i.e., modern science.
• The philosophical basis of the American Revolution are to be found in the works of English philosopher John Locke (1632-1704). John Locke wrote An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690) and Treatises on Public government (1690 too). He advocated limited sovereignty and held that revolution was not only a right but an obligation if liberty were threatened. These are the very ideas expressed in the Declaration of IndependEnce (1776). [Governments have no legitimacy without the consent of the governed]
• … it was John Locke who, in the early eighteenth century, claimed that a man defines himself primarily by laboring to acquire and develop a piece of property, taking it out of a state of wildness [sic] and into one of cultivation. Donald Worster, Under Western Skies: Nature and History in the American West (New York: OUP, 1992) 233.
▼ The Enlightenment (1)
• A European philosophical and social movement of the eighteenth century, often referred to as 'the Age of Reason'. Enlightenment philosophers developed a variety of progressive ideas: freedom of thought and expression, the criticism of religion, the value of reason and science, a commitment to social progress and the significance of individualism. These critical, secular ideas played a crucial role in the emergence of modern societies [modernity]. The principal adherents of the Enlightenment included M. Condorcet (1734-94), D. Diderot (1713-84), D. Hume (1711-76), I. Kant (1724-1804), J. H. J. Rousseau (1712-78) and Voltaire (1694-1778). Source: www.xrefer.com
• 'Enlightenment', and its equivalents in other European languages, denotes an intellectual movement which began in England in the seventeenth century (Locke and the deists), and developed in France in the eighteenth century (Bayle, Voltaire, Diderot, and other Encyclopedists) and also (especially under the impetus of the rationalist philosophy of Christian Wolff) in Germany (Mendelssohn, Lessing). But virtually every European country, and every sphere of life and thought, was affected by it. The age in which the movement predominated is known as the Age of Enlightenment or the Age of Reason.
Thus the leading doctrines of the Enlightenment, shared by many, if not all, of its spokesmen, are these:
1. Reason is man's central capacity, and it enables him not only to think, but to act, correctly.
2. Man is by nature rational and good. (Kant endorsed the Christian view of a 'radical evil' in human nature, but held that it must be possible to overcome it.)
3. Both an individual and humanity as a whole can progress to perfection.
4. All men (including, on the view of many, women) are equal in respect of their rationality, and should thus be granted equality before the law and individual liberty.
5. Tolerance is to be extended to other creeds and ways of life. (Lessing conveyed this message in his play Nathan the Wise (1779).)
The ideas of the Enlightenment and its criticism of government and Church fuelled revolutionary thinking in France and the US and were influential on writers and politicians such as Jefferson and Paine. (The Oxford English Reference Dictionary, © Oxford University Press 1996) (Xrefer.com.)
▼ The Enlightenment (2)
• [The Enlightenment was a] European and North American movement flourishing in the eighteenth century which stressed tolerance, reasonableness, common sense and the encouragement of science and technology. Technological optimism underlay the central belief that by understanding (through observation and experiment and rationality) and applying nature's laws the material position of all humankind could be indefinitely improved, as part of progress and evolution. (David Pepper, Modern Environmentalism An Introduction (London Routledge, 1997, 327 passim)
▼ Republican experiment
• It was generally believed at the time of the American Revolution that democracy could not work, especially on a large scale--a republic. It was believed that bribery and corruption inevitably led republics to dictatorship. But Americans were determined to show the world that a large-scale republic could work. It was the republican experiment. Jefferson's agrarianism, the Constitution (1787) and the Bill of Rights (1791) were decisive factors.
• The Founding Fathers launched an experiment not only in representative democracy, but also an experiment in large scale democracy--a republic. The ideas of the Enlightenment were possibly appealing to European intellectuals, but few people thought they could work in practice. The principle of a representative democracy, i.e. electing representatives to decide in your place was possibly acceptable by the elite, but to apply this principle and make it work for all male citizens sounded like rebellion against the established order. Moreover, a large scale republic had never worked before. Perhaps a new country, separate from Europe, could try and test such ideas. Indeed, some Europeans saw America as a place where to start anew: "By the eighteenth century the European Enlightenment had developed a view of America as a special place where human society might begin anew, uncorrupted by Old World institutions and ideas" (William Earl Weeks, Building the Continental Empire: American Expansion From the Revolution to the Civil War (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1996) 61.
• Once the Founding Fathers had established their institutions with a constitution for each state (1776) and the Articles of Confederation (1777) soon to be replaced by the Constitution (1787), they had founded a new social order based on natural rights--equality, individual freedom-- the separation of powers, justice for all. Of particular importance was the fact that the principles that were the foundation of the American republic were thought to be universal, applicable to all men in the rest of the world. This gave the Founding Fathers, more exactly the Jeffersonians, an excuse and a justification for territorial expansion.
• Human rights
▼ The historical background of the Constitution
▼ Ordered liberty
• One should lay emphasis on the following goal: “Ensure Domestic Tranquility.“ People were fed up with chaos at home, Indian wars, and social unrest (Shays' rebellion 1786).
• These goals can be summarized by the concept of “ordered liberty”: the freedom of Americans implies loyalty to the Constitution and obedience to the laws established under the Constitution, to maintain social order.
▼ Wikipedia
• The authors of the U.S. Constitution intentionally chose what they called a republic for several reasons. For one, it is impractical to collect votes from every citizen on every political issue. In theory, representatives would be more well-informed and less emotional than the general populace. Furthermore, a republic can be contrived to protect against the “tyranny of the majority.“ The Federalist Papers outline the idea that pure democracy is actually quite dangerous, because it allows a majority to infringe upon the rights of a minority. By forming what they called a Republic, in which representatives are chosen in many different ways (the President, House, Senate, and state officials are all elected differently), it is more difficult for a majority to control enough of the government to infringe upon a minority.
• See this query.nytimes.com—fullpage.html
▼ Interests
• Difference of interests endlessly eroded constitutional unionism.
▼ Constitution making
• Federalists vs. Antifederalists
▼ Minority rights and majority rule
▼ Minority rights and majority rule (Wikipedia)
• The authors of the U.S. Constitution intentionally chose what they called a republic for several reasons. For one, it is impractical to collect votes from every citizen on every political issue. In theory, representatives would be more well-informed and less emotional than the general populace. Furthermore, a republic can be contrived to protect against the “tyranny of the majority.“ The Federalist Papers outline the idea that pure democracy is actually quite dangerous, because it allows a majority to infringe upon the rights of a minority. By forming what they called a Republic, in which representatives are chosen in many different ways (the President, House, Senate, and state officials are all elected differently), it is more difficult for a majority to control enough of the government to infringe upon a minority.
▼ Minority rights and majority rule (Knupfer 2)
• In a democracy, majority rule is .. the rule. It is worth noting however that it was considered by its framers that one of the functions of the Constitution was to protect the rights of minorities—in other words southern planters and slave owners—against the rule of the majority—the rest of the Union. This principle is still valid today, the Constitution and especially the first ten Amendments (the Bill of Rights) protecting individual freedoms. Over the centuries, the Constitution has thus protected more and more persons and minorities' rights (the Wasp colonial elite, all white males, all males, women, Indians, Afro Americans and other ethnic minorities, endangered species, ...).
▼ A series of compromises:
▼ The Great compromise
• There were mainly two forces at work in the Constitutional Convention. The delegates from the larger states favored a system based on population, and therefore advocated a strong legislature directly responsible to the citizens. The delegates from smaller states wanted a system based on the equality of states regardless of population or wealth. They did not want a national government to have power over the people. A compromise was then the solution. It was called the Great Compromise. Accordingly the legislative power was divided into two houses. The House of Representatives would be based on population; the Senate would represent the states. Hence, the formation of the House of Representatives and the Senate under the Constitution 'has been -called The Great Compromise. Source: American History Social Studies Baron Educational Series, p. 52
▼ Three fifths compromise
• Population for representation purposes determined by adding a state's free population and 3/5ths of the slave population. www.jpstone.com—final_exam_review1.htm
▼ Fugitive slave clause
▼ A clause in the Constitution—even if the words “slave“ or “slavery“ do not appear in it, that stated that runaway slaves had to be arrested and sent back to their masters if caught in the free states.
• “Section. 2.
…
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.”
This clause was seen by Southerners as proof of the Northerners' agreement to follow the compromise tradition and respect their minority rights. With the rise of abolitionism in the 1830s and later, this clause became a source of extreme sectional tensions in Congress. [Fugitive Slave Act of 1850].
▼ Tariffs
• Another compromise achieved for framing the Constitution was over economic matters. The southern states with their export of tobacco and naval stores led the agricultural interests in demanding that a two-thirds vote be required to pass laws regulating foreign commerce, the. Their principal fear was that there might be an export tax. The northern states with a strong commercial interest wished to have import taxes levied to stimulate the growth of manufacture, so they opposed the two-thirds vote requirement. The agricultural interests were placated by two provisions: export taxes were made illegal, and Congress could pass no law interfering with the importation of slaves until 1808, except for a tax, which was never levied, of $10 per head. In return for these two concessions the commercial states of the north were favored by a provision permitting import taxes, tariffs, to be levied by a simple majority vote. Source: American History Social Studies Baron Educational Series, p. 52 The issue of tariff (The Tariffs of Abomination, 1828), led to another compromise in 1833.
▼ Ratification (1788...)
▼
• The Constitution was accepted by the Convention on September 17, 1787. It was officially ratified when New Hampshire ratified it on June 21, 1788. The first Congress under the Constitution popped into being on the 4th of March, 1789, and had its first quorum on April 6, 1789. The Executive was active on April 30, 1789. The Judiciary was active on February 2, 1790. www.usconstitution.net—constfaq_a3.html
▼ Federalist papers
• www.gradesaver.com—about.html [Accessed September 20, 2002]. ClassicNote on The Federalist Papers
Background on the Federalist Papers:
... The Federalist Papers were written in support of the ratification of the Constitution. While modern day readers might not see, the Constitution was a revolutionary step. In Philadelphia, the delegates rebelled against the existing Articles of Confederation and looked to the states, not the existing government, for ratification and approval of the new government. Because of the revolutionary nature of the new constitution, arguments were necessary to [make the Constitution acceptable by the people.] Both George Washington and Ben Franklin, probably the two most influential men in the country, supported the Constitution. Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York were the states critical to the success or failure of the Constitution. Of these four states, New York by far was the state where the success of the constitution was in the most doubt. … Quickly, Alexander Hamilton decided that a massive propaganda campaign was necessary in New York, much more than in any other states. This new plan entailed a saturation theory, a sustained barrage of arguments appearing in newspapers four times a week. Because of the massive amounts of work, he decided that he needed two co-authors to help him write under the pseudonym of “publius.“ Although he originally had asked others to assist him in the project but luckily for him and future generations, James Madison, a Virginia citizen, was available because the Continental Congress was sitting in New York during that period. John Jay was also asked because of his vast foreign diplomatic service. Unfortunately, John Jay was injured shortly after the project commenced and was able to only complete six different papers. That left Hamilton and Madison to finish the rest, a task they were able to complete only because they relied heavily on notes they had used in the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia earlier. Eventually, the papers were published not only serially in different newspapers in New York (four out of five of the major newspapers of the time) as well as republished in book form near the end of the run. Unfortunately, the ratification vote in New York failed and New Yorkers only were able to ratify the constitution after Delaware was the ninth state that approved ratification and would have rendered New York as a sole state looking in at a union. James Madison, however, took the published books to assist in the ratification debate in Virginia and the papers survived for a far greater purpose than merely propaganda. The Federalist Papers are the single greatest interpretive source of the Constitution of the United States, the best insight and explanation of what the Founding Fathers purpose was in the passage of the document that governs the United States of America.
• Philosophically, The Federalist Papers should also be considered in the context in which they were written. The revolutionary era was characterized by a quest for security from foreign nations, for peace in America, and for individual freedom. These values, it was hoped, could be achieved by united action. And whereas earlier plans of union were largely motivated by a desire for security and peace, those of the period under consideration as the appearance of the freedom motive. That motive came to the fore during the colonists' struggle with England and was recognized by the Articles of Confederation. In the arguments in Philadelphia and the subsequent Federalist Papers this same motive held force and arguments of unity and security, while seeming almost absurd to readers familiar with the power of the modern United States, were sincere concerns and problems.
▼ The Constitution
▼ The goals of the Constitution
▼ Avoid the return of tyranny (monarchy, British colonial rule)
▼ Separation of powers
• The three powers—the legislative, the executive, the judiciary—are separated.
▼ They form a system of checks of balances
• Each power partly controls the others. For example the President (the executive) can veto a bill passed in Congress (legislative), and Congress can override the President's veto if a 2/3 majority is in favor of the bill.
The President may veto the bill: he sends it back to the house in which it originated. If EACH house then passes the bill by a 2/3rds vote taken by roll-call it becomes law. This is OVERRIDING a veto. E.g. NIXON refused to approve such measures as the Clean Water Act of 1972, which was passed over his veto. If not the bill is dead.
• Bicameralism
▼ Establish “a more perfect union“
• "Form a more perfect Union, Establish Justice, Ensure Domestic Tranquility, Provide for the Common Defense, Secure the Blessings of Liberty"
• ... a more perfect union than under the Articles of Confederation. Many questions remain unsolved.
▼ Madisonian constitutional heritage (American constitutionalism)
• American constitutionalism 
The four principles of American constitutionalism from Madison'’s Declaration of Rights:
- The People are the source of sovereignty [Mention the concept of popular sovereignty]
- The People may delegate, but not alienate their sovereignty
- The People have the right to reform Government
- The people are by nature equally free and independent with certain inalienable rights
Constitutionalism came to define the belief of those who considered the Constitution as the most appropriate means to create and maintain the Union alias the US.
• Republicanism in the United States
▼ “We the people“
• These are the first words of the Constitution. The people is/are all American citizens, the American nation, so that the Constitution binds all American citizens and secession is unacceptable.
▼ The Constitution as a shaky foundation of the Union
• Juxtaposition of freedom and slavery
▼ A shaky foundation for a perpetual union
• Basic question: is the United States a union of states since delegates from states, not delegates from all the American people framed the Constitution? Or is the United States a nation, (“We the people“) with one people and one language?
Technically, the Constitution created a union of states, so that power and sovereignty reside in the states who agree to form “a more perfect union,“ not in the federal state thus created, nor in the American people. In which case, States implicitly have the right to secede.
But if the goal of the Constitution was indeed to create “a more perfect union“ to create a nation, secession was even more unacceptable.
Absence of consensus on whether the USA was a nation of states or of citizens (Knupfer 60)
Weakness of the constitutional union resting on shaky consensus and compromises (Knupfer 22)
• A nation of states or of citizens?
• Nature of the Union
▼ Statesmanship
• The art of being a statesman, i.e. a skilled, experienced, and respected political leader or figure.
▼ The influence of the success of the Constitution: "The Era of Good Feeling"
• Spirit of accommodation
• Patriotism
• Public good
• Mutual affection
• Moderation
• Constitutionalism
▼ Unionism
• A synonym for American patriotism, especially in the first decades of the nineteenth century. It can be defined as the reverence for the Union i.e. the United States as opposed to sectionalism or parochialism.
▼ Constitutional unionism
• A belief system encompassing the theory, ethics, operation, and structure of a constitutional system as it was perceived by those who framed and implemented it. Constitutional unionism assumed that the Union was neither automatically self-perpetuating nor completely supreme over the states. The Union was limited by the Constitution; its legitimacy and therefore its perpetuity rested on consensus-the “mutual affections“ of its citizens who, short of outright revolution, could gather constitutional majorities (presumably a number equivalent to three-fourths of the states) to end the Union at any time. Therefore, constitutional unionists did not accept the legitimacy of secession [by one state then] or nullification; they could accept the idea of federal supremacy within the sphere marked out by the Constitution and established by congressional, administrative, and judicial precedent over long stretches of time. The ambivalent and apparently contradictory character of constitutional unionist thought was an understandable outgrowth of the pragmatic outlook common to denizens of the political center. And it could have predictable consequences, for when faced with sectional crises that exposed the inherent conflicts between states and nation, freeman and slaveholder-conflicts that were incorporated into the compromises of the Constitution-constitutional unionists preferred old formulas to new institutions or ideas for advising a troubled country. (Knupfer 3)
• Compromise tradition
▼ Forces, principles and ideas that influenced U.S. politics in the first half of the nineteenth century
▼ Sectional balance
• alias Balance of power between the North and the South / sectional balance / sectional equilibrium
• This was a basic principle organizing American politics in Congress until the Civil War. The Missouri Compromise is an example of this basic rule: Missouri was created as a slave state and Maine was cut off from Massachusetts as a free state to keep the balance.
• Sectional Tension had been continually rising throughout the 1800's in America. The vast differences of Southern and Northern living had been made even greater with the North adopting a general favoring of abolition. The laws being passed for the country now had more implications over sectional tension. The power of Congress and Senate was split between Northern abolitionists and Southern slave and plantation owners. The basic idea for stability was a balance of power in Congress and the Senate. However, for this balance to happen, America needed an equal number of slave and non-slave states.www.darien.k12.ct.us—background.html
▼ Missouri Compromise
• faculty.umf.maine.edu—Missouri Compromise map.jpg Missouri was to enter the Union (= the United States) as a full state but the question was to know whether it would enter the Union as a free state or as a slave state: no political solution could be found until Henry Clay arranged a compromise: Missouri would be admitted as a slave state. Maine would be cut loose from Massachusetts as a free state, and Congress decreed that slavery would be excluded north of the parallel 36° 30'. The Missouri Compromise excluded slavery from Louisiana Purchase lands.
▼ Centrifugal forces
▼ Sectionalism
• An exaggerated devotion to the interests of a region, here. Often refers to the oppositions between North and South. (Syn. sectional antagonism)
▼ States' Rights
• The idea that individual states could limit the power of the federal government. Often opposed to federalism. Originally, this was Thomas Jefferson's theory.
J. C. Calhoun defended the theory of states' rights on the grounds that it was delegates from the original 13 states, NOT from "the people", who had framed the Constitution. Therefore the legitimacy and sovereignty of the United States depended on the consent of each and every state in the Union.
Federalists on the contrary considered that such legitimacy and sovereignty originated in the American people as stated in the first sentence of the Constitution ("We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union"). The people formed one nation indivisble under God, speaking one national language codified by Noah Webster.
• www.buyandhold.com—a_jackson_pt_2.html Accessed 6 January 2003
Jackson's presidency (1829-37) encompassed the guts of the "states' rights" debate, which was the central argument in the years running up to the Civil War. The doctrine of states' rights simply implied that the individual states had authority in matters not relegated to the federal government. One giant of a man, South Carolina's John Calhoun, was the central figure in the issue, as well as the corollary, "nullification," the latter having to do with the assumption that states may not choose to enforce federal law.
▼ Nullification
• Calhoun, John Caldwell (1782 - 1850) US statesman; vice president (1824-32), a champion of the southern states and a defender of slavery. His famous Nullification theory (...1832) claimed the rights of states to nullify congressional laws that they considered unconstitutional. He encouraged the annexation of Texas to provide another slaveholding state and to strengthen the power of the South.
▼ Slavery
• Also called the peculiar institution
▼ Wilmot Proviso
• encarta.msn.com—RefArticle.aspx Saturday 5 October 2002
The Wilmot Proviso, amendment attached to an appropriations bill adopted in 1846 by the U.S. House of Representatives, proposed by David Wilmot, a Democratic representative from Pennsylvania. At the conclusion of the Mexican War, President James Knox Polk requested from Congress the sum of $2 million in order to indemnify the Mexican government for territory annexed by the U.S. The Wilmot Proviso moved to exclude slavery from the acquired territory and was approved by the House on August 8, 1846. The U.S. Senate adjourned without considering the measure and, following a second approval by the House on February 1, 1847, the bill was rewritten by the Senate to exclude the amendment. [It did not pass the Senate] Because it brought into sharp focus the differences then existing on the slavery question, the proviso was the subject of widespread controversy that resulted in increased hostility between the northern and southern states. The principle of the amendment became the basic policy of both the Free-Soil Party and the Republican Party.
John C. Calhoun ... foresaw that the acquisition of new territory [as a result of the war with Mexico 1846-1848] would bring the question of slavery expansion into the open. The man who opened the door was an obscure Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, David Wilmot. On 8 August 1846, about twelve weeks after the war began, the President asked Congress for a secret appropriation of $2 million as a down payment to bribe Santa Anna into ceding California. Wilmot proposed an amendment to the $2 million bill that in any territory so acquired 'neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist,' a phrase copied from the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. ... The Wilmot proviso did not pass. Source: Morison, Samuel Eliot, Henry Steele Commager, William E. Leuchtenburg. A Concise History of the American Republic. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983, pp. 245-46.
▼ Popular sovereignty
▼ A principle that stated that the question of slavery should be left to the decision of the territorial settlers themselves
• See Wilmot proviso,
▼ Politics of conscience
• A new form of politics that emerged with the rise of abolitionism after the 1830s. It "deplored compromise as an unacceptable sacrifice of moral principles" (Knupfer 164) and eroded the compromise tradition.
▼ Unifying ideals
▼ Public good (Knupfer 10)
• Sacrifice self-interest for the public good were the motives of the heirs to the founding Fathers and Constitution framers.
▼ Spirit of accommodation
• Part of the heritage of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution framers who had reached compromises to create the Union through concessions. See mutuality
• Fear of the dissolution of the Union
▼ Mutuality
• The foundation of the compromise tradition that developed after the ratification of the Constitution (1787-90) and lasted until the Civil War and possibly after Reconstruction (Compromise of 1877). The compromise tradition was the result of the patriotism of a new generation of American politicians who turned to the Constitution as the founding text of the Union—an attitude sometimes called "constitutional catechism" (Knupfer 78) and who constructed the Constitution—its interpretation.
Such a strategy relied on compromise as its main principle in the wake of "the great compromise" and implied mutual moderation, mutual concessions, mutual respect, conciliation, forbearance, reciprocity, civility, mutual affection, ("fraternal affection" as G. Washington put it in his Farewell Address,1796), intersectional comity especially between North and South to overcome sectional conflicts.
Even if it was more and more difficult to resort to a strategy of compromise and mutual concessions after the territorial acquisitions of the Mexican Cession (1848, Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty) on account of the slavery extension issue and deadlocks in Congress (legislative paralysis) over the Missouri line (see Missouri Compromise), the rhetoric and rituals of the compromise tradition survived until the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 and until the Civil War.
▼ Federalism
• Sharing of power between national and state governments. Example: Roads: interste highways are the responsivbility of the federal governemnt while states build state highways.
▼ Preservation of the Union
• One of the major obsessions of patriots in the times of the Early Republic and later (Abraham Lincoln). Ant.: nullification, secession
▼ Statesmanship
• [Statesmanship: the art of being a good leader or politician, a good statesman]
Henry Clay especially believed that statesmanship would preserve the policy of compromise inherited from the early days of the Republic and save the nation from the dangers of sectionalism and party politics.
▼ Political parties in the history of the U.S.A.
▼ The first party system (post Revolution period) included the Federalist Party and the Republican Democratic Party (anti-federalists, Jeffersonians)
▼ The Federalist Party (led by Alexander Hamilton)
• disappeared after the War of 1812 (1812-14) as New England, where most Federalists were, had not supported the war effort and even refused to go to war with England.
▼ The Republican Democratic Party (anti-federalists, Jeffersonians)
• Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic Party in 1792 as a congressional caucus to fight for the Bill of Rights and against the elitist Federalist Party. In 1798, the "party of the common man" was officially named the Democratic-Republican Party and in 1800 elected Jefferson as the first Democratic President of the United States. Jefferson served two distinguished terms and was followed by James Madison in 1808. Madison strengthened America's armed forces -- helping reaffirm American independence by defeating the British in the War of 1812. James Monroe was elected president in 1816 and led the nation through a time commonly known as "The Era of Good Feeling" in which Democratic-Republicans served with little opposition. The election of John Quincy Adams in 1824 was highly contested and led to a four-way split among Democratic-Republicans. A result of the split was the emergence of Andrew Jackson as a national leader. The war hero, generally considered -- along with Jefferson -- one of the founding fathers of the Democratic Party, organized his supporters to a degree unprecedented in American history. The Jacksonian Democrats created the national convention process, the party platform, and reunified the Democratic Party with Jackson's victories in 1828 and 1832. The Party held its first National Convention in 1832 and nominated President Jackson for his second term. In 1844, the National Convention simplified the Party's name to the Democratic Party. Source www.democrats.org—history.html
▼ Mass politics
• In the 1830's, the emergence of the party system, the suffrage being granted to all white males under Andrew Jackson's presidency created a new political trend. Politics was no longer the exclusive sphere of an elite. More and more Americans got involved into politics especially when the extension of slavery or the tariff were the issues of the day.
▼ The Second Party System (1820s-1860s) included the Democratic Party and the Whigs.
• The (Jacksonian) (Republican) Democratic Party (the continuation of the above Republican Democratic Party) see above
▼ The Whig Party
• www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk—USAwhig.htm The Whig Party was established in 1834 by politicians opposed to the "executive tyranny of Andrew Jackson. The party was named after to the Whig Party in the House of Commons that at the time was advocating democratic reforms in Britain. In 1840 the party's presidential candidate, was William Henry Harrison. He defeated Martin Van Buren of the Democratic Party by 1,275,017 votes to 1,128,702. However, four years later, the decision by the anti-slavery Liberty Party to put up a candidate, James Birney (62,300), split the vote and enabled James Polk [a Democrat] (1,337,243) to defeat Henry Clay (1,299,068). [Henry Clay was the most prestigious leader of the Whig Party.]
The Whig Party returned to power in 1848 when Zachary Taylor (1,360,101) defeated Lewis Cass (1,220,544) and Martin Van Buren (291,263). The party disintegrated following its refusal to take a stand on slavery issue. In 1852 the war hero Winfield Scott was nominated as its candidate. The party was badly divided with Southerners deeply suspicious of Scott's views on slavery. Franklin Pierce won 1,601,474 votes against Scott's 1,386,578. Most Whigs joined the newly created Republican Party in 1854.
▼ The Free-soil party
• The Free-soil movement appeared in the mid to late 1840s (Knupfer 167).
At a time of mounting crisis, both parties in 1848 [for the election of 1848] turned to men with military backgrounds... The Democrats named Senator Lewis Cass of Michigan, an ardent expansionist, veteran of 1812, and Jackson's Secretary of War. The Whigs nominated General Zachary Taylor, hero of the Mexican War. A third party, the Free-soil, was formed by a coalition of three elements-the abolitionist Liberty party, 'conscience' or anti-slavery Whigs, and Northern Democrats alienated by Polk's policies on patronage, the tariff, or rivers and harbors. 'Free soil, free speech, free labor, and free men' was the slogan. Van Buren, convinced that only slavery restriction could save the Union, accepted the Free-Soil presidential nomination, with the 'conscience' Whig, Charles Francis Adams, as his running mate. Among the former Democrats who rallied to the Free-soil standard was David Wilmot. Source: Morison, Samuel Eliot, Henry Steele Commager, William E. Leuchtenburg. A Concise History of the American Republic. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983, p. 246. www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk—USASfreesoil.htm
In August 1848 at Buffalo, New York, a meeting of anti-slavery members of the Whig Party and the Liberty Party established the Free-Soil Party. The new party opposed the extension of slavery into the western territories. The main slogan of the party was "free soil, free speech, free labor, and free men". In the 1848 presidential election, Martin Van Buren, the party's candidate, polled 10 per cent of the vote. He split the traditional Democratic support and enabled the Whig candidate, Zachary Taylor, to win.
By 1852 the Free-Soil Party had 12 congressmen but in presidential election, John P. Hale won over 5 per cent of the vote. Two years later, remaining members joined the Republican Party.
▼ Third party system (1850's to the present)`
• The Democratic Party (the continuation of the Republican Democratic Party and later Jacksonian Democratic Party) and the Republican Party
▼ The Republican Party (today's Republican Party)
• The Whigs were the party of the wealthy. The Democrats were the spiritual heirs of Jefferson and his agrarian values: simplicity, frugality, virtue. In 1854, dissatisfied with their party's stance on the issue of slavery, northern Democrats, and former Whigs founded the Republican Party. The same year [1854], the disorganized remnants of the [Free-Soil] party were absorbed into the newly formed Republican Party, which carried the Free-Soil idea of opposing the expansion of slavery one step further by condemning slavery as a moral evil as well.
Liberty Party
▼ Manifest Destiny
• The phrase “Manifest Destiny” was coined by John L. O’Sullivan, archexpansionist editor of the Democratic Review, a very influential periodical of that era. He wrote: it is “the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions” (1845).
The emergence of Manifest Destiny followed the "victory" of the United States over Britain at the end of the 2nd War of Independence (1812-14). It created a feeling of American superiority and nationalism.
Manifest Destiny, in American history, is the supposed belief that America was the land of the chosen people of God, and consequently promised to a great destiny. This assumption justified the conquest of the frontier or the annexation of Indian and Spanish territories. America came to be regarded by Americans as the model nation, important enough to extol its image of a redeeming country, under God and His providence.
The phrase "manifest destiny" was coined by J. O'Sullivan in 1845, the year when Polk was elected president on an expansionist platform. The next year, the Oregon treaty was signed. Manifest Destiny was already a very popular doctrine.
(WASP) civilization and progress were thus to advance into the wilderness. WASP institutions (democracy, individual liberties, public education) were thought to be superior and therefore should be spread across the continent. Protestantism was also thought to be a superior form of religion, better than Spanish Jesuits’ Catholicism.
An associated notion was that of the "natural law tradition": Those who wasted the land (Spanish missions, Indians) must yield.
• (Source of the following: Caroll and Noble (167)
American expansionists in the first half of the 19th century argued that the United States had a "Manifest Destiny" to stretch its influence until the Pacific coast. Central to the concept of Manifest Destiny was the belief in American superiority: democracy, political liberty, the Protestant religion. Expansionists wanted to protect the virgin lands of the West from the Spanish Jesuits.
▼ Wilderness > Territory > Statehood (Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance (1787))
• The three stages of settlement of the vast open lands of the American northern continent were
1) Indian occupation [wilderness]
2) the arrival of white fur traders, then squatters or settlers and pioneers in a territory (for example the Oregon Territory)
3) access to statehood
▼ This pattern had been organized by Jefferson under his Land Ordinance (1785) and then the Northwest Ordinance (1787).
• The Land Ordinance of 1785 was modified again into the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. It ruled that the formation of a new state in the Northwest Territory required a population of 60,000. It stipulated again that the western lands would move toward full, independent statehood within the Union. Every new state would enter the Union on an equal footing with the original thirteen. It also prohibited slavery in the area.
With the exception of Texas & California all the western states were admitted to the Union in accordance with this ordinance.
Obviously, it was the Founding Fathers' aim to avoid the extension of slavery in the West. It firmly established the principle of congressional power over slavery in a territory.
▼ This principle was finally abolished in the name of popular sovereignty.
• Antebellum period