Dr. Williams Midterm based on Review Sheet

Describe the founding generation’s understandings of freedom, equality, and good government, and how they shaped attitudes towards political parties and the right to vote

Understandings

• Freedom: Liberty depended on independence and on limits on power. Citizens needed virtue, meaning they put the common good over self-interest.

• Equality: It was equality of citizens before the law, not of condition. Society still had natural leaders.

• Good government: Rule by educated, propertied "best men" (gentry republicanism), with checks against concentrated power.

• Patriarchal republicanism: Independent male household heads were the true citizens, which excluded women, dependents, and the enslaved.

Effect on parties

• Parties looked like self-interested factions that threatened virtue and the common good.

• Opposition seemed like conspiracy, not legitimate disagreement. This helps explain why 1790s politics got so ugly.

Effect on the right to vote

• Voting was a privilege tied to property and independence. Owners had a stake in government, and the dependent might be swayed by others.

• Over time, property requirements fell, leading to universal white manhood suffrage by the 1830s-40s.

Memory hook: Virtue, independence, and the "best men" meant no parties and a limited vote.

Virtue

Idea of a person keeping in mind the common good of society by rising above self-interest; to be balanced with liberty

Classical republicanism

What they early government was based on; people had the same legal status; ruled by representatives; prioritizes common good and virtue over one’s individual desires

Patriarchal republicanism

Concept that equality exist among and between, not within, households; did not see individuals, but as households with the male as the head and other members as dependents

Gentry republicanism

Idea that the most accomplished and refined would be the best to rule; FF feared the idea of majority rule because they would not everyone contained virtue to balance their liberty

How James Madison felt about party politics

James Madison expressed his opinions of political parties in Federalist #10; he calls for a large republic so that there was too much variation in people’s life so that that control by the majority is not possible; saw that parties led to the pursuit of private interests rather than serving the whole

How Thomas Jefferson felt about party politics

Jefferson disliked parties in principle but led one. He saw the Federalists as a dangerous faction pushing toward monarchy, and the Republicans as defenders of the republic.

• After 1800: He wanted to end the Federalist party, not by purging officeholders (which upset some Republicans), but by winning over its supporters.

• Practice: He led his party in Congress and used its organization to govern.

Memory hook: He disliked parties but led one, and he wanted the other side to disappear.

How Alexander Hamilton felt about party politics

Hamilton distrusted parties in principle, seeing them as factions that put self-interest above the common good. In practice, he led the Federalists and treated the Jefferson-Madison opposition as a dangerous faction, not a legitimate opposition.

Memory hook: He disliked parties but led one.

How James Monroe felt about party politics

Monroe disliked parties and hoped to end partisan conflict.

• Strategy: As president during the Era of Good Feelings, he drew cabinet members from across the country (including John Quincy Adams) and tried to absorb opponents instead of fighting them.

• Context: The Federalists had collapsed after the Hartford Convention and the War of 1812, so Republicans ruled alone. 1816 was the Federalists' last presidential campaign.

• Outcome: Without a real opposition, the Republicans split into factions, especially after the Panic of 1819 and the Missouri crisis.

Memory hook: Monroe tried to end parties, but one-party rule just split the Republicans.

How Martin Van Buren felt about party politics

Van Buren saw organized parties as legitimate and necessary, unlike the founders, who feared them as factions.

• Parties as healthy: A loyal, organized opposition is a normal part of republican government.

• Party before principle: A national party could unite men across sections and keep slavery out of national politics, a lesson from the Missouri crisis.

• Practice: He built the Albany Regency and the Democratic party with discipline and patronage.

Memory hook: The founders feared parties, and Van Buren built one.

Richard Hofstadter’s argument about party politics

Richard Hofstadter (The Idea of a Party System, 1969) argued that Americans only gradually came to accept parties and legitimate opposition.

• Founders' view: They saw parties as dangerous factions that threatened the republic.

• The shift: Over the early republic, from the 1790s through the 1820s-30s, people came to see a loyal opposition as legitimate and even necessary.

• Van Buren: His argument that organized parties were necessary and could restrain personal ambition fits this shift.

Memory hook: Parties went from "evil factions" to "legitimate opposition."

Compare the postures of Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson with James Madison toward constitutional government

Hamilton favored a strong national government and a broad construction of the Constitution. Implied powers let Congress use any means not prohibited to reach constitutional ends, and he used this to defend the national bank. He wanted to build a commercial, manufacturing economy tied to the Northeast, with the debt program as the foundation.

Jefferson and Madison favored strict construction. If the Constitution doesn't authorize a power, the government doesn't have it, so they said it did not permit a national bank. They feared concentrated power and saw Hamilton's program as favoring wealthy Northeastern interests. They envisioned a mostly agrarian republic with limited federal power and more authority left to the states. Later, in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, they argued states could declare federal acts unconstitutional.

Memory hook: Hamilton: broad construction and development. Jefferson/Madison: strict construction and limited government.

The irony to note on an exam: Jefferson later used Hamilton's broad reading to justify the Louisiana Purchase

Compare the postures of Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson with James Madison toward American development

Hamilton wanted active, government-directed development. He wanted a diversified commercial and manufacturing economy, built on the debt program (to build credit and tie wealthy creditors to the government), a national bank, and support for industry. He saw a strong central government and close ties with Britain, the main trading partner, as the way to national power and prosperity.

Jefferson and Madison favored agrarian development. They wanted an expanding nation of independent farmers, who they believed would sustain virtue and liberty. They distrusted banks, speculators, and industrial cities, which they linked with dependence and corruption. They criticized Hamilton's program as favoring wealthy Northeastern interests, favored westward expansion and open trade, and sympathized with France over Britain.

Memory hook: Hamilton: factories, finance, and a strong nation. Jefferson/Madison: farms, freedom, and limited government.

Exam nuance: The divide wasn't absolute. Madison and Jefferson later accepted pieces of Hamilton's approach (Madison signed the Second Bank in 1816, and Republicans adopted a protective tariff).

Issues and policies that divided Congress and Washington’s cabinet into opposing political camps in the first half of the 1790s

The main dividing lines were Hamilton's economic program and foreign policy.

1. Debt program: Hamilton wanted the federal government to pay its debts in full and take on the states' debts. Critics said it rewarded speculators and favored Northeastern creditors over farmers and states that had already paid.

2. National bank: This was the constitutional test case. Hamilton used broad construction and implied powers, while Jefferson and Madison argued for strict construction. Washington sided with Hamilton.

3. Whiskey tax: The excise tax angered western farmers and led to the Whiskey Rebellion, which Washington put down with military force. Opponents saw it as a symbol of federal overreach.

4. Foreign policy: The French Revolution split Americans. Hamilton and his supporters favored Britain, trade, and order, while Jefferson and Madison sympathized with France and republican ideals. The Jay Treaty (1794-95) deepened the split and sparked grassroots organizing.

Memory hook: Debt, bank, whiskey, France.

Exam point: These disputes pushed Jefferson and Madison into open opposition, forming the early Republican camp against Hamilton's Federalists.

Hamilton’s debt program

Paying the debt from the American Revolution was an issue; Hamilton wants to slowly pay the debt to IOU holders, but to the holders and not the original buyers; Federal government would pay the state debts; Madison and Jefferson finally given in to Hamilton’s controversial plan under the following conditions 1) The capital is moved from NY to the South 2) tariffs are set to pay the debt 3) A whiskey tax is put in place 4) Hamilton wants to create a National Bank

Hamilton’s national bank

Hamilton introduced the National Bank as part of his debt plan; a private bank that housed the federal government’s money

Broad construction

Supported by Hamilton; argues that the constitution needs some flexibility and that there were implies powers in the constitution, allowing the constitution to be applies to the changing circumstances of the country; the ends are constitutional as long as the means are not unconstitutional

Strict construction

Supported by Jefferson; nothing in the constitution permits an action, then it should not be done; worries about the slippery slope of congress and the federal government having unchecked power

Whiskey tax

Part of Hamilton’s debt plan; taxes alcohol; harmed the domestic market by making it harder for grain farmers to sell their product; leads to the Whiskey rebellion where people refused to pay the tax because it harmed their businesses

Trace the popular mobilization that by the mid-1790s sorted Americans into Democratic Republican and Federalist parties

Opposition to Hamilton's program grew from a congressional dispute into a nationwide movement, and by the mid-1790s it had sorted voters into two camps.

1. Congress (1790-92): Madison and Jefferson opposed Hamilton's debt program and bank, and the National Gazette gave the opposition a newspaper voice.

2. French Revolution (1793): Americans split over France. Republicans sympathized with its republican ideals, while Federalists feared disorder and favored trade with Britain.

3. Democratic-Republican Societies (1793-94): Shopkeepers, craftsmen, and other non-elite citizens met to discuss politics. Elites were alarmed, and Washington saw such groups as improper interference with government.

4. Whiskey Rebellion (1794): Washington crushed it and blamed the societies, hardening Federalist fear of popular opposition.

5. Jay Treaty (1794-95): It kept the peace but won little. It sparked petitions, protests, and grassroots organizing, and Madison built an anti-treaty coalition in Congress.

6. Election of 1796: The first competitive presidential contest, with Adams (Federalist) vs. Jefferson (Republican).

What each side believed and where it was strongest:

• Federalists: Order, strong central government, commerce, ties to Britain. Strongest in the Northeast and trade areas.

• Republicans: Equality, anti-elitism, limited government, sympathy for France. Strongest in the agricultural South, with some urban support. The Mid-Atlantic was the battleground.

Why politics got ugly: Each side believed the other would destroy the republic. Federalists feared French-style mob rule, and Republicans feared a Federalist drift toward monarchy.

What did DR and F parties say they believed, where were they strongest, who supported them, who were their leaders, and why did politics get so ugly?

	Federalists	Democratic-Republicans
Beliefs	Order, strong central government, commerce, a national bank and debt program, close ties with Britain. They called themselves friends of order and government.	Equality, anti-elitism, limited government, strict construction, an agrarian republic, sympathy for the French Revolution.
Strongest	Northeast and trade areas (New England, port cities).	Agricultural South, plus some urban support.
Supporters	Merchants, creditors, the wealthy and established elite, many professionals.	Farmers and planters, plus shopkeepers, craftsmen, and many immigrants (Irish, for example).
Leaders	Hamilton, John Adams, Washington (above the fray but sympathetic).	Jefferson and Madison.

Battleground: The Mid-Atlantic states, especially New York and Pennsylvania, could swing either way.

Why politics got ugly:

• Parties were seen as illegitimate. The founders thought parties were factions, so each side saw the other as a conspiracy against the republic, not a loyal opposition.

• Each feared the other's worst case. Federalists feared French-style mob rule, and Republicans feared a drift toward monarchy.

• High-stakes foreign policy. The French Revolution and the Jay Treaty made disagreements feel like questions of national survival.

• Partisan newspapers and societies spread attacks widely.

• It escalated into law. The Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) criminalized criticism of the Federalists, and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions answered with nullification.

Memory hook: Federalists: order, commerce, Britain, Northeast. Republicans: equality, agriculture, France, South.

French Revolution

The French Revolution (began 1789) was the foreign event that split Americans along the lines of the emerging parties.

• Republicans sympathized with it as a fight for liberty and equality, an extension of the American Revolution. They leaned toward France, the Revolutionary War ally.

• Federalists were horrified by the radicalism and violence, especially after the execution of the king and the Terror. They feared disorder and mob rule at home and favored order, trade, and ties with Britain.

• Effects in America: Once France and Britain went to war (1793), the US had to decide how to respond, which led to Washington's neutrality policy and the Jay Treaty (1794-95). Rising tensions with France led to the XYZ affair and the undeclared naval war, which Federalists used to justify the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798).

Why it matters: It turned domestic disagreements over Hamilton's program into a larger fight over what kind of republic America should be. Each side saw the other as a threat to it.

Impressment

Practice of the English towards American ships during the French Revolutionary Wars; US wanted to remain neutral during the war while also trading with both nations; English retaliate by seizing American sailors off of American ships when cutting off their trade; British consider the American sailors possible desserts and force them into British military service; American consider this a hostage situation but can’t do much since they have to play nice with Britain since they trade goods with them

Jay Treaty

John Jay went to negotiate a treaty with Britain to keep peace amidst the chaos of the French Revolutionary Wars and impressment; treaty doesn’t do much; Britain does not accept American neutrality; only allows small portions of trade; does not agree to stop impressment; Many Americans angry at Jay for the treaty; prompts the creation of an anti-treaty coalition in Congress led by Madison

Democratic-Republican societies

Groups composed of citizens who are not among the elite and discuss politics and events; share Jefferson and Madison’s opposition to Hamilton’s debt plan; societies make people nervous because they look like political parties and gave the idea that the unaccomplished were trying to govern; Washington disliked them

Election of 1796

First truly competitive election; two parties are forming; Jefferson vs. Adams; Adams wins; Generally, support for the Federalists came from Northeast in trade areas and Republican support came from agriculture in the south and urban areas; not a clear split through

Alien and Sedition Acts

Put in place by Federalists claiming national security; put in place by Adams; Alien Act extended time for immigrants to become citizens; barred immigrants from enemy nations from becoming citizens at all; allowed government to deport or jail immigrants over national security concerns; Sedition Act stopped people from gathering together with the intent to form dissent; stopped the printing of anything negative or in opposition to the Federalists

Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions

Madison and Jefferson authored it in response to the Alien and Sedition Act; resolution claimed that if the federal government attempted to use power not specifically granted, the state could declare the acts as unconstitutional/nullification; only passed in Virginia and Kentucky; does not state what to do after the act is invoked

John Adams

John Adams (Federalist) was the second president (1797-1801), elected in 1796 with Jefferson, his Republican rival, as vice president.

• Foreign crisis: The XYZ affair (French agents demanded bribes) led to an undeclared naval war with France. Adams built up the navy and army.

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798): Passed by the Federalist Congress and signed by Adams. They targeted immigrants and critics, and the backlash helped Republicans. Madison and Jefferson answered with the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions.

• Split with Hamilton: Hamilton led the party's hardliners and wanted a larger army. Adams eventually sought peace with France, and the feud divided the Federalists. Some of the taxes to pay for the army also made the party unpopular.

• Election of 1800: He lost to Jefferson and Burr. Before leaving office, he appointed Federalists to the courts, including John Marshall as chief justice, who served for decades.

Memory hook: XYZ, Alien and Sedition, feud with Hamilton, lost in 1800.

Outline the development of the Republican and Federalist parties after 1799. What were the consequences, in terms of policy, of the opposition party taking power in 1801? What became of the Federalists and why?

Development after 1799

• Republicans organized better than the Federalists, using newspapers, a congressional caucus, and floor leaders. Backlash against the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Federalists' property tax, and the standing army helped them.

• Federalists were split between Adams and Hamilton and were poorly organized. They were slow to adjust their platform, and the 3/5 Compromise gave Republicans an edge in the Electoral College.

• Election of 1800: A bitter campaign, ending in a 73-73 Jefferson-Burr tie. The House chose Jefferson, and the 12th Amendment created separate votes for president and VP. It was the first peaceful transfer of power between parties.

Policy consequences of Republicans taking power (1801)

• Change was limited, since the founders designed the system to guard against sudden, sweeping change.

• What changed: Let the Alien and Sedition Acts lapse. Abolished the whiskey and property taxes. Cut spending, especially the military. Jefferson adopted a more casual style and led his party in Congress.

• What stayed: He kept Hamilton's debt program and let the Bank run until its charter expired. He didn't purge Federalist officeholders, which upset some Republicans.

• Judiciary: Federal judges were hard to remove, so Marshall's court stayed Federalist.

• Republicans acting like Federalists: Jefferson used broad construction for the Louisiana Purchase (1803).

What became of the Federalists, and why

• Embargo (1807-09): Hurt trade regions and briefly revived them, and they got better at marketing themselves.

• War of 1812: Unpopular in New England, where they talked states' rights and secession.

• Hartford Convention (1814): They floated amendments (repeal the 3/5 clause, limit immigrants in office). It ended just as peace came and Jackson won at New Orleans, so they looked unpatriotic.

• End: Their last presidential campaign was 1816 (Monroe won), and the party faded.

Memory hook: Republicans organized, Federalists split, then the war ruined the Federalists.

Election of 1800

Parties create tickets to attract the largest area of voters; Jefferson and Burr (R) vs. Adams and Pinckney (F); high stakes election because people think the other party will destroy the republic if they win; lots of low blows, attacking each others characters; Republicans win, but it has to be decided between Jefferson and Burr who will be the president; vote goes to the House of Representatives; Burr does not step aside but the vote goes to Jefferson; The Twelfth Amendment is passed, casting different votes for Pres and VP

Aaron Burr

Aaron Burr ran as a Democratic-Republican in the election of 1800, alongside Jefferson; he refused to step down when the vote was sent to the House of Representatives; Burr became vice president; four years later, he killed Hamilton in a duel; him becoming VP pushed for the 12th Amendment

Louisiana Purchase

1803; Jefferson was interested in purchasing the land to expand agriculture; Jefferson had to think like Hamilton to secure the deal, as there was nothing said in the constitution about purchasing land, so he uses Hamilton’s broad interpretation of the constitution to allow himself to purchase the land; Major Federalists support the purchase, but some don’t

John Marshall

Last minute Federalist appointment before Jefferson took office; ruled in McCulloch vs. Maryland where he claimed that Congress had implied powers in the Constitution; Marshall is still active during Jackson’s president; ruled that the states had no jurisdiction over Native Nations and that the federal government alone could conduct business with them; Jackson refuses to enforce his decision

McCulloch v. Maryland

Supreme Court decision by Federalist Marshall; claims that Congress had implied powers in the Constitution; promotes a broad construction of the Constitution

The Embargo

The Embargo Act (December 1807, repealed March 1809) was Jefferson's attempt to avoid war with Britain and France. Both were seizing American ships and Britain was impressing sailors. It banned American exports and barred ships from leaving for foreign ports. Jefferson hoped that cutting off trade would pressure them into respecting American neutrality.

• Why it failed: Neither Britain nor France changed course. It hurt the US more, especially New England merchants, shipping, and Southern planters whose crop prices collapsed. Smuggling was widespread.

• Irony: Jefferson, the champion of limited government, used heavy-handed federal enforcement to carry it out.

• Politics: It was unpopular and revived the Federalists in New England. They gained seats in 1808, though Madison still won the presidency. It also helped set the stage for the War of 1812.

Memory hook: Jefferson tried to starve Britain and France of trade and ended up starving his own ports.

Hartford Convention

1814; New England Federalists came together in a meeting led by moderates; Aimed at stopping NE Federalists for calling for secession; moderates propose an amendment to fix the issues upsetting them, specifically calling for the repeal of 3/5ths clause, prohibit immigrants from serving in public office, make it more difficult for territories to become states, and endorse nullification; convention disbanded just as peace treaty for the War of 1812 was made and Jackson won in New Orleans; puts a nail in the Federalist coffin in light of victory

War of 1812

The War of 1812 was the US war with Britain, declared by Congress in June 1812 under President Madison.

• Causes: British impressment of American sailors, British interference with American trade, and British support for Native resistance on the frontier (Tecumseh). Young Republican "War Hawks" such as Clay and Calhoun pushed for war to defend national honor and independence.

• Party split: Republicans mostly backed the war, and Federalists opposed it. Madison still won reelection in 1812 over DeWitt Clinton, whom Federalists backed.

• Course: The US was poorly prepared and the war was mismanaged. Trade suffered badly, and Washington was burned in 1814. The Treaty of Ghent (December 1814) restored the prewar status quo. Jackson's victory at New Orleans came after the treaty was signed, but it made the war feel like a success.

• Federalist collapse: New England Federalists talked states' rights and secession and met at the Hartford Convention (1814). Peace and New Orleans made them look unpatriotic, and the party faded after 1816.

• Republican nationalism: The war exposed national weaknesses, and Republicans turned to the Second Bank (1816), the protective tariff of 1816, and internal improvements. This led into the Era of Good Feelings.

Memory hook: Impressment and Tecumseh started it, Hartford ended the Federalists, and New Orleans made it feel like a win.

Describe the period of one-party Republican rule after the War of 1812, in particular, why that party became so dominant and how it became less cohesive

Why the Republicans became so dominant

• The Federalists collapsed. The Hartford Convention and the war's end made them look unpatriotic, and 1816 was their last presidential campaign (Monroe won easily).

• A "victorious" war. New Orleans made the war feel like a success, and it exposed national weaknesses that Republicans moved to fix.

• A nationalist program. Republicans took up Federalist-style policies: the Protective Tariff of 1816, the Second Bank of the US (1816), and internal improvements. Calhoun and Clay led this push.

• Monroe's strategy. In the Era of Good Feelings he drew cabinet members from across the country (including John Quincy Adams) and tried to absorb opponents instead of fighting them.

How the party became less cohesive

• Old-school resistance. Quids, led by John Randolph of Virginia, feared a loose reading of the Constitution would threaten slavery and states' rights.

• Panic of 1819. Land speculation on credit crashed when the Bank demanded repayment in gold and silver. Blame fell on the Bank, Republicans had second thoughts about energetic government, and Southerners resented tariffs.

• Missouri crisis. A proposal to gradually end slavery in Missouri split Republicans by section. The Missouri Compromise (Maine free, Missouri slave, the 36°30' line) settled it, but slavery became something to keep out of national politics.

• No opposition to unite against. With the Federalists gone, the party fractured into factions and personalities, which set up 1824, when four Republicans ran for president.

Memory hook: Federalists collapsed, Republicans took their program, then the Panic and Missouri tore the party apart.

Era of Good Feelings

Federalist party finally collapses; the illusion of victory in the War of 1812 puts the Federalists in a bad light; Federalists run a candidate in 1816, but they barely get a state and Monroe wins; ten years follow with no opposition from the Democratic-Republicans

Second Bank of the United States

Republicans create a new national bank in 1816, despite Jefferson not liking that Hamilton did it; five years lapse since Hamilton’s charter ended; Republicans make the bank more powerful; able to regulate general banking in the country; can request payment of loans in gold and silver, rather than bank notes; can require that if it got banks notes, the bank would have to pay in gold or silver; discouraged banks from printing money beyond the assets they actually had, thus discourage inflation, depreciation of currency, and speculation; can make borrowing easier or more difficult, by requiring banks to pay off notes

Protective tariff

1816; increases fees on certain imports to increase the price of foreign goods to encourage domestic industry; sets off debates; shows Republicans embracing an active concept of Federal government; protective tariffs in the 1830s set off South Carolina calling for nullification

James Monroe

President during the Era of Good Feelings; had a clear victory against the Federalist; in his victory, he conjures images of harmony and unity, but his idea of unity is the DR swallowing the Federalists

John Calhoun

John C. Calhoun of South Carolina changed from a nationalist into the leading defender of states' rights and slavery.

• Early nationalist (1810s): A War Hawk who pushed for the War of 1812. As Monroe's Secretary of War, he backed the Second Bank, the Protective Tariff of 1816, and internal improvements.

• Shift in the 1820s: After the Panic of 1819 and the Missouri crisis, he saw national power as a threat to the South and slavery, and he moved toward states' rights.

• Jackson's vice president: He broke with Jackson over the Nullification Crisis. Calhoun argued South Carolina could nullify the tariff, while Jackson hated nullification and prepared to use force. The rest of the South didn't follow, and Clay and Calhoun crafted a compromise lowering the tariff over time.

• Opposition to Jackson: Calhoun, Clay, and Webster all opposed him, but Calhoun was at the opposite end from nationalists like Clay and Webster on state power.

• Later: As Tyler's Secretary of State, he pushed Texas annexation, citing Britain's interest in an abolitionist Texas, and broke the parties' silence on slavery.

Memory hook: War Hawk and nationalist, then nullifier and defender of slavery.

John Randolph

John Randolph of Roanoke was a Virginia congressman and the leading voice of the old-school Republicans (the Quids) who resisted the party's post-1815 nationalism.

• Strict constructionist: He held to the original Republican principles of limited government, strict construction, and states' rights. He saw the party's turn toward Hamiltonian policies as a betrayal.

• Opposed the nationalist program: He fought the Second Bank, the Protective Tariff of 1816, and internal improvements. Many of these old-school Republicans were Southerners who feared that a loose reading of the Constitution could threaten slavery.

• Break with the party: He split from Jefferson and Madison in the early 1800s and became a critic from within, which helped make the Republicans less cohesive.

• Missouri crisis: He opposed federal interference over slavery and fought the Missouri Compromise, a view that later fed into Southern states' rights politics.

Memory hook: Randolph was the Republican who stayed Jeffersonian while the party turned Hamiltonian.

Political consequences of the Panic of 1819

Cause: Land speculation on credit (fueled by cotton demand and bank notes) crashed when cotton prices fell and the Second Bank demanded repayment in gold and silver. State banks then called in loans.

Political consequences:

• Banks took the blame, especially the national Bank, which damaged the nationalism of the postwar Republicans.

• Second thoughts about energetic government. Republicans grew wary of federal power and special privileges, and the Panic cooled enthusiasm for the Bank, tariffs, and internal improvements.

• Southern resentment. Southerners disliked the tariff and national economic policies, and many white Southerners grew wary of federal power in general.

• Sectional tension. It hit just before the Missouri crisis, and the two together split Republicans by section and turned slavery into something to keep out of national politics.

• Longer-term: Anti-bank, anti-privilege sentiment carried into the 1820s and fed Jacksonian politics and the Bank War.

Memory hook: The Panic soured Americans on banks and big government, then Missouri split the party

Political consequences of the Missouri crisis

What happened: Missouri applied for statehood as a slave state in 1819. The Tallmadge Amendment proposed banning further slavery there and gradually freeing the enslaved already in Missouri. It split Congress by section, not party. The Missouri Compromise (1820) admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, and banned slavery in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36°30' line.

Political consequences:

• It split the Republicans by section. Northern and Southern Republicans voted against each other, which broke the one-party unity of the Era of Good Feelings.

• It ended the postwar nationalism. Southerners saw that a strong national government could threaten slavery, so they turned toward strict construction and states' rights.

• It exposed slavery as a national issue. Slavery had been avoided in national politics, and Missouri showed it could tear the parties apart.

• It taught a lesson to politicians. Van Buren and others concluded that slavery had to be kept out of politics, which led to the "party before principle" strategy that built the Democratic party.

• It set a precedent. The 36°30' line shaped later fights over slavery in new territories.

Memory hook: The Panic soured people on big government, and Missouri turned slavery into a sectional fight that the parties tried to bury.

Sum up the meaning for party politics of fundamental developments in American social, economic, and cultural life in the first half of the nineteenth century, most especially changes in how people worked and how things were moved and made

What changed (the Market Revolution)

• Moving things: Before 1815 life was local, roads were poor, and transport was expensive. Afterward came steamboats, canals (the Erie Canal linked the Great Lakes to the Atlantic), roads, railroads, the telegraph, and a growing postal system.

• Making things: Farmers produced for distant markets, and production was simplified so unskilled labor could do it. Craft careers shrank and wage work grew.

• Cultural life: The Second Great Awakening brought evangelical revivals, especially in areas changed by the economy (the Burned-Over District of western New York). It pushed reform and a belief that people should make the world fit for Christ's return.

Meaning for party politics

• Freedom was redefined. Independence, the republican ideal, was harder to keep as people became wage workers and depended on markets and banks.

• Inequality and concentrated power were feared, which fed distrust of banks and "special privilege."

• New policy questions. What should government do about internal improvements, banks, and tariffs, and who pays (state or federal)? These questions became the heart of Democratic vs. Whig debate.

• Reform politics. Revivalism pushed moral causes (temperance, education, prisons, abolition) and a view of government as a tool for reform, which Whigs embraced and many Democrats resisted.

• Parties as a way to manage change. By the 1830s, party politics became how Americans talked about and tried to control economic and social change.

Memory hook: Canals, wage work, and revivals turned politics into a fight over banks, improvements, and morals.

Market Revolution

The Market Revolution was the shift after 1815 from a mostly local, household-based economy to one where goods, crops, and labor were produced for distant markets.

• Transportation and communication: Steamboats, canals (especially the Erie Canal), roads, railroads, the telegraph, and the postal system cut costs and linked regions.

• Farming and production: Farmers grew crops to sell far away, and production was simplified so unskilled workers could do it. Craft careers shrank and wage work grew.

• Credit and banking: Markets ran on credit and paper money, which raised the stakes of banks and panics (1819, 1837).

• Social and cultural effects: It reshaped family and work life and fed the Second Great Awakening and reform movements.

Political meaning: Independence, the core republican ideal, was harder to keep as people became dependent on wages, markets, and banks. This raised fears of inequality and concentrated power. It also created new questions about what government should do about internal improvements, banks, and tariffs. These became the central issues between Democrats and Whigs.

Memory hook: Canals, wages, and credit changed how people lived, and parties fought over how government should respond.

Second Great Awakening

The Second Great Awakening was a wave of evangelical Protestant revivals that swept the US from the early 1800s through the 1840s, peaking in the 1820s-30s.

• Where: It was especially intense in areas transformed by the Market Revolution. The Burned-Over District of western New York, along the Erie Canal, saw so many revivals that it was said there was no "fuel" left to burn. It also produced lasting movements like the Mormons.

• Message: Optimism and individual responsibility. People could choose salvation and should work to make the world fit for Christ's return.

• Reform: It energized movements for temperance, education, prison and asylum reform, and abolition. The Anti-Masons also grew out of the Burned-Over District.

Political meaning:

• Many evangelical Yankees saw government as a tool for moral reform, and they largely joined the Whigs.

• Democrats, including many Catholics and immigrants, resisted moral-reform laws like temperance and school-based Protestantism.

• Passionate moral issues like alcohol and slavery were hard for parties to manage, and they pushed slavery into politics through Garrison and other abolitionists.

Memory hook: Revivals along the canal produced reformers, and reformers shaped the Whig party.

Erie Canal

The Erie Canal (built 1817-1825) was a New York State canal connecting the Hudson River at Albany to Lake Erie at Buffalo, linking the Great Lakes region to the Atlantic.

• Economic impact: It sharply cut the cost and time of moving goods and people, so western farmers could sell crops in eastern markets and eastern manufactured goods could flow west. New York City became the nation's leading port, and towns like Rochester, Buffalo, and Syracuse boomed.

• Symbol of the Market Revolution: It was the best-known example of how transportation changes linked regions and pulled farmers into distant markets.

• Social and cultural impact: It brought rapid change to western New York, the region of the Burned-Over District, where revivals and reform movements flourished.

• Political meaning: It fueled the debate over internal improvements. New York paid for it with state funds, and its success inspired a wave of canal building and pressure for more roads, canals, and later railroads. Whigs backed government-funded improvements, while many Democrats worried about their cost, favoritism, and federal power.

Memory hook: The Erie Canal connected the Great Lakes to the Atlantic and became the model for the Market Revolution.

Burned-Over District

The Burned-Over District was the area of western and central New York along the Erie Canal where the Second Great Awakening revivals were so intense that preachers said the region had been "burned over," with no fuel left for new revivals.

• Why there: The canal brought rapid economic and social change, with new towns, markets, and wage work. Many people were looking for meaning and order amid that upheaval.

• What it produced: Intense revivals and new movements, including the Mormons and many reform causes (temperance, abolition, women's rights). Reformers there often saw government as a tool for moral improvement.

• Politics: It was the home of the Anti-Masons, who saw Masons as a secret elite and ran the first third party in 1832. Many of its evangelical reformers later joined the Whigs.

Memory hook: The canal brought change, change brought revivals, and revivals brought reform movements and Whig voters.

Developments in political practices (such as the expanding right to vote) and political thought that underlie the emergence of a new system of competing parties in the 1820s and the 1830s

Developments in political practice

• Expanding suffrage: Property requirements fell, first in new western states and then in the East, which wanted to keep men from leaving. By about 1840, over 90 percent of adult white men could vote (universal white manhood suffrage). Race and gender replaced property as the boundary.

• Popular choice of presidential electors: State legislatures gave up the power to choose electors, so candidates had to campaign among ordinary voters. This produced mass politics, higher turnout, and rallies and newspapers.

• Party machines and patronage: Organizations like Van Buren's Albany Regency in New York used patronage (government jobs as rewards) and discipline to mobilize voters and keep the party loyal.

• Nominating conventions: The congressional caucus, attacked as undemocratic in 1824, was replaced by conventions. The Anti-Masons held the first national party convention in 1831-32.

Developments in political thought

• Parties became legitimate. The founders saw parties as dangerous factions. Van Buren and others argued that organized opposition was necessary and healthy, and that party loyalty could restrain personal ambition and keep slavery out of national politics ("party before principle").

• Democratic, anti-elite ideas: Jacksonians stressed "equal rights" and the common man, and opposed special privilege, the national bank, and aristocracy.

• Debates over government's role: The Market Revolution raised questions about banks, tariffs, and internal improvements, and who should pay for them. These issues gave parties real differences to fight over.

Memory hook: More voters, popular elections, and machines made parties necessary, and new ideas made them respectable.

Universal white manhood suffrage

Universal white manhood suffrage was the near-elimination of property and tax requirements for voting, so nearly all adult white men could vote by the 1830s-40s.

• How it happened: New western states wrote constitutions with few or no property requirements. Eastern states followed, partly to keep men from moving west.

• Limits: It was not universal. Race and gender replaced property as the boundary. Women could not vote, most free Black men lost or were denied the vote (as in several Northern states), and enslaved people had no voice.

• Political effects: The electorate grew sharply, and states moved to popular choice of presidential electors. Candidates had to campaign among ordinary voters, which produced mass politics, rallies, and higher turnout.

• Party effects: Parties organized to mobilize voters through newspapers, conventions, party machines like the Albany Regency, and patronage. Jacksonian rhetoric about the "common man" and "equal rights" fit this new electorate.

Memory hook: Property fell, race and gender stayed. More voters made parties necessary.

Albany Regency

The Albany Regency was Martin Van Buren's political machine in New York, a disciplined group of Democratic leaders who ran the state party from Albany in the 1820s-30s. It was an early model of the modern party organization.

• Leaders: Van Buren and allies such as William Marcy and Silas Wright.

• Methods: Party discipline, newspapers, and patronage (government jobs as rewards for loyalty). Loyalty and organization mattered more than personal ambition.

• Ideas: It put party first. Van Buren argued that organized, legitimate parties could restrain personal ambition and unite men across sections.

• Impact: It helped Van Buren build the national coalition behind Jackson. It showed how to mobilize an expanded electorate and became a model for party machines nationwide.

Memory hook: Van Buren's machine made patronage and party discipline the tools of mass politics.

Patronage

Patronage is the practice of giving government jobs and favors to supporters as rewards for party loyalty.

• Early use: Jefferson didn't purge Federalist officeholders after 1800, which upset some Republicans who wanted jobs for their own. He was selective about it.

• Machines: Van Buren's Albany Regency used patronage to enforce party discipline and mobilize voters. Jobs rewarded those who worked for the party.

• John Quincy Adams: He refused to use patronage to build support, and that hurt him against Jackson's organized party.

• Jackson: He defended rotating loyal supporters into federal jobs as democratic, since ordinary men could do the work. Critics called it the "spoils system."

• Political meaning: It gave parties a way to reward workers and keep them loyal in an era of mass politics. Critics saw it as corruption.

Memory hook: Jobs for loyalty. Van Buren perfected it, Adams refused it, Jackson defended it.

Trace the development of a new Democratic Party after 1824. Who were its leaders, and what were its earliest goals?

Development after 1824

• Election of 1824: Four Republicans ran (Adams, Crawford, Clay, Jackson). Jackson won the most popular and electoral votes but no majority, so the House chose Adams after Clay backed him. Adams then made Clay Secretary of State, and Jacksonians called it a "corrupt bargain" that defied the will of the people.

• Opposition to Adams: Adams wanted big national projects, but Congress refused, and he wouldn't use patronage to build support. Jacksonians organized against him from the start.

• Van Buren builds the coalition: He turned the Republican remnants into a national network linking regions. The Tariff of 1828 (raising duties on goods competing with western, New York, and Pennsylvania products) helped win those states, even though it hurt the South and New England.

• Election of 1828: Jackson beat Adams, who now led the National Republicans, in a dirty personality contest with high turnout. He was the first president from west of the Appalachians and born poor, and plain folk saw themselves in him.

Leaders

• Andrew Jackson: The popular hero and symbol of the "common man."

• Martin Van Buren: The organizer behind the party, using the Albany Regency and "party before principle."

• John Calhoun: Jackson's vice president, who later broke with him over nullification.

Earliest goals

• Win the presidency for Jackson and undo the "corrupt bargain."

• Open government to ordinary (white) men, using patronage and rotating loyal supporters into office.

• Build a national party that put unity ahead of sectional quarrels and kept slavery out of politics.

• Policies: limited federal government, opposition to special privilege, cheap land, low taxes, and Indian removal, with no other clear platform in 1828.

Memory hook: Stolen in 1824, organized by Van Buren, won in 1828.

What position towards governmental power and presidential authority did Andrew Jackson take in his first term as president and whom did he upset?

Positions on governmental power

• Limited federal government on economic matters. He vetoed the Maysville Road bill (1830), saying the federal government had a limited role in mostly in-state improvements. He opposed Clay's American System, favoring cheap land, low taxes, and "equal rights" with no special privileges.

• Strong presidential authority. He used the veto aggressively and vetoed the recharter of the Second Bank (1832). His veto message used strict construction, states' rights, and class themes (bank stock held by foreigners and the wealthy). He also rewarded loyal supporters with government jobs (patronage).

• Federal supremacy on nullification. He hated South Carolina's attempt to nullify the tariff and prepared to use the military. South Carolina backed down after a compromise tariff, crafted by Clay and Calhoun, lowered duties over time.

• States' rights on Indian removal. Southern states wanted Native Americans removed. Marshall's Court ruled that states had no jurisdiction over Native Nations, but Jackson refused to enforce the ruling.

Whom he upset

• Calhoun and South Carolina nullifiers, over his stand on nullification.

• Clay, Webster, and the National Republicans, who backed the American System, the national bank, and national development.

• The Bank's defenders, including its president Nicholas Biddle.

• Native Americans, along with Northern nationalists and evangelical reformers who opposed removal.

• Critics of executive power, who called him "King Andrew" for overriding Congress and the courts.

• Some Southerners, who complained he violated states' rights.

Memory hook: Small government on roads and banks, strong president on everything else.

Election of 1824

The Election of 1824 was a contest among four Republicans, since the Federalists were gone. It was decided in the House and ended in the "corrupt bargain" charge.

• Candidates:

  • John Quincy Adams: New England, favored active government and national development.

  • Henry Clay: The West, favored active government and internal improvements.

  • William Crawford: Georgia, backed by the congressional caucus, favored limited government and states' rights.

  • Andrew Jackson: The war hero, relied on personal popularity and had national appeal.

• Caucus: Crawford won the caucus nomination, but the other candidates rejected the caucus as undemocratic. Crawford then suffered a stroke.

• Result: Jackson won the most popular and electoral votes in every region but no majority. Under the 12th Amendment, the House chose among the top three (Jackson, Adams, Crawford), so Clay, who finished fourth, was out.

• The "corrupt bargain": Clay threw his support to Adams, who won in the House. Adams then named Clay Secretary of State. Jacksonians said the will of the people had been defied.

• Consequences: Adams wanted big national projects, but Congress refused, and he wouldn't use patronage to build support. Jacksonians organized against him from the start, and Van Buren built a new Democratic party that won in 1828.

Memory hook: Jackson won the most votes, Adams won the House, and Clay got the job.

“Corrupt Bargain”

The "corrupt bargain" was the charge that Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams made a deal to give Adams the presidency in 1824.

• What happened: No candidate won an electoral majority, so the House chose among the top three. Clay finished fourth, was eliminated, and used his influence as Speaker of the House to back Adams. Adams won, then named Clay Secretary of State, which was then seen as the stepping stone to the presidency.

• The accusation: Jackson's supporters said Adams and Clay had traded votes for a job and overridden the will of the people, since Jackson had won the most popular and electoral votes.

• Evidence: Historians have found no proof of an explicit deal, and the charge is disputed. It worked politically either way.

• Consequences: It crippled Adams's presidency and rallied Jackson's supporters. Van Buren built a new Democratic party around the grievance, and Jackson won in 1828.

Memory hook: Clay backed Adams, Adams made Clay Secretary of State, and Jacksonians cried "corrupt bargain."

John Quincy Adams

John Quincy Adams (son of John Adams) was the sixth president (1825-29). A former Republican, he became the leader of the National Republicans.

• Before the presidency: He was a diplomat and served in Monroe's cabinet as Secretary of State, which showed Monroe's strategy of drawing leaders from across the country.

• Election of 1824: He finished second to Jackson in the popular and electoral vote but won in the House after Clay backed him. He then named Clay Secretary of State, which led to the "corrupt bargain" charge.

• Program: He favored active government and national development: internal improvements, roads and canals, and a strong national economy (the ideas behind Clay's American System).

• Why he struggled: Congress refused his big national projects, and he wouldn't use patronage to build support. Jacksonians organized against him from the start, and he was seen as an elitist.

• Election of 1828: He lost to Jackson in a dirty personality contest with high turnout. His supporters were the National Republicans, who never built an organization as dense as Van Buren's.

• Later career: He served in the House and opposed the gag rule (general knowledge).

Memory hook: He won the House in 1824, lost the people in 1828, and had a program but no party machine.

Henry Clay

Henry Clay of Kentucky was a leading nationalist, the champion of the American System, and the main Whig leader. He ran for president several times and lost.

• Early career: A young War Hawk who pushed for the War of 1812. After the war, he and Calhoun led the Republican nationalist push for the Second Bank, the Protective Tariff of 1816, and internal improvements.

• American System: Federal support for tariffs, a national bank, and internal improvements, funded by land sales and tariffs, to grow the national economy. Jacksonians saw it as unequal and preferred cheap land and limited government.

• Election of 1824: He finished fourth and was eliminated from the House vote. He backed Adams, who then made him Secretary of State, which led to the "corrupt bargain" charge.

• Against Jackson: He lost to Jackson in 1832 after the Bank veto. Clay opposed Jackson's use of power and became a leader of the Whigs, the party of improvement and the national bank.

• Compromiser: With Calhoun, he crafted the compromise tariff that ended the Nullification Crisis. He is also known for the Missouri Compromise.

• Election of 1844: As the Whig candidate against Polk, he opposed Texas annexation, then backtracked, angering antislavery Northern Whigs, who formed the Liberty Party. This likely cost him a key state.

Memory hook: War Hawk, American System, "corrupt bargain," Whig leader, and a three-time loser to Jackson and Polk.

Martin Van Buren

Martin Van Buren of New York was the organizer of the Democratic party, Jackson's vice president, and the eighth president (1837-41).

• Views on parties: Unlike the founders, he argued that organized parties were legitimate and necessary. Party loyalty could restrain personal ambition, and a national party could unite men across sections and keep slavery out of politics ("party before principle").

• Party builder: He ran the Albany Regency in New York, using party discipline and patronage. He built a national network linking regions and helped Jackson win in 1828. The Tariff of 1828 was meant to win western and Mid-Atlantic states, even though it hurt the South and New England.

• Election of 1836: He won after Jackson's endorsement, beating three regional Whig candidates (Harrison, White, Webster) who tried to throw the election to the House.

• Panic of 1837: It struck soon after he took office, and he was blamed. His answer was the Independent Treasury, which kept government funds out of banks.

• Election of 1840: He lost to William Henry Harrison in a high-turnout campaign.

• Election of 1844: He opposed annexing Texas, and Southern Democrats blocked his nomination, choosing Polk.

Memory hook: He built the machine and made parties respectable. The Panic of 1837 cost him a second term.

Tariff of 1828

The Tariff of 1828 was a high protective tariff passed to help Jackson's coalition in the 1828 election. Opponents called it the "Tariff of Abominations."

• Purpose: Van Buren and the Jacksonians raised duties on imported goods that competed with products from the West, New York, and Pennsylvania (such as raw materials). The aim was to win those swing regions for Jackson.

• Who it hurt: The South, which sold cotton abroad and bought manufactured goods, and New England manufacturers, who faced higher costs for raw materials. Van Buren knew he couldn't beat Adams in New England and wouldn't win the South anyway, so he focused on the West and Mid-Atlantic.

• Political meaning: It showed Van Buren building a national coalition through regional deals instead of a single ideology. Jackson and the Democrats took a protective stance when it helped them win, even though they later talked of limited government and low taxes.

• Aftermath: Southern resentment fed the Nullification Crisis. South Carolina, backed by Calhoun, refused to pay the tariff, Jackson prepared to use force, and a compromise tariff by Clay and Calhoun lowered duties over time.

Memory hook: Built to win the West and Mid-Atlantic, it angered the South and led to nullification.

Election of 1828

The Election of 1828 was a rematch of 1824, pitting Andrew Jackson (Democrat) against President John Quincy Adams (National Republican). Jackson won decisively.

• Candidates and coalitions: Adams's supporters rebranded as National Republicans (active national government, internal improvements). Jackson's supporters, organized by Van Buren, formed the new Democratic party.

• Issues: The "corrupt bargain" of 1824, the Tariff of 1828 (aimed at western and Mid-Atlantic swing states), and a contest between the common man and the elite. Jackson had no clear platform beyond reform, opening government to ordinary men, and Indian removal.

• Campaign: A dirty personality contest shaped by evangelical fervor. Adams was attacked as an elitist who would bring gambling to the White House, and Jackson was called a temperamental murderer.

• Organization: Van Buren built a dense national network linking regions, while the National Republicans never matched it.

• Result: Jackson won with high turnout, the first president from west of the Appalachians and born poor. Plain folk saw themselves in him, and he invited ordinary people to the White House.

Memory hook: Avenging the "corrupt bargain," Jackson and Van Buren's organization beat Adams's elitist image.

Nullification Crisis

The Nullification Crisis (1832-33) was a standoff in which South Carolina claimed the right to nullify the federal tariff and Jackson threatened force.

• Cause: Southern resentment of the Tariff of 1828 (and the 1832 tariff, which only lowered it somewhat). The South sold cotton abroad and bought manufactured goods, so it felt tariffs taxed one region to help another.

• Theory: Calhoun argued that a state could declare a federal law unconstitutional and void within its borders. This built on the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.

• South Carolina's action: A state convention declared the tariffs null and void and threatened to leave the Union if the government used force.

• Jackson's response: He hated nullification and prepared the military. He asked Congress for the Force Bill, which authorized him to enforce the law. This was federal supremacy, even though he held limited-government views on banks and roads.

• Resolution: The rest of the South did not follow South Carolina. Clay and Calhoun crafted a compromise tariff that lowered duties over time, and South Carolina backed down.

• Break with Calhoun: Calhoun, Jackson's vice president, broke with him and became the leading defender of states' rights and slavery.

• Political meaning: It showed that Jackson would use federal power against a state when the Union was at stake, even as he refused to enforce Marshall's ruling on Indian removal. Critics from the South said he violated states' rights, and critics in the North said he used personal authority over Congress and the courts ("King Andrew").

Memory hook: South Carolina nullified, Jackson threatened force, Clay and Calhoun cut a deal.

Indian Removal

Indian removal was Jackson's policy of moving Native Americans off their lands, mainly in the South, to open them to white settlement.

• Support: Southern states wanted Native Americans removed by law. Removal was one of Jackson's few clear goals in 1828.

• Court ruling: Marshall's Court held that states had no jurisdiction over Native Nations, but Jackson refused to enforce the ruling.

• Opposition: Northern nationalists and evangelical reformers opposed removal.

• Contradiction: Jackson backed federal power against South Carolina on nullification, but let Georgia and other states defy the Court on removal.

Memory hook: Jackson enforced the law against nullifiers but not for Native Nations.

Daniel Webster

Daniel Webster of Massachusetts was a nationalist who opposed Jackson.

• Against Jackson: He joined Clay and Calhoun in opposing Jackson, though Webster and Clay were nationalists who favored strong national power, while Calhoun moved toward states' rights.

• Whig: He was part of the anti-Jackson coalition that became the Whigs.

• Election of 1836: He was one of three regional Whig candidates (with Harrison and White) who tried to throw the election to the House. Van Buren still won.

John Calhoun

John C. Calhoun of South Carolina went from nationalist to defender of states' rights.

• Early nationalist: A War Hawk and Monroe's Secretary of War, he backed the Second Bank, the tariff of 1816, and internal improvements.

• Shift: After the Panic of 1819 and the Missouri crisis, he turned toward states' rights.

• Nullification: As Jackson's vice president, he argued South Carolina could nullify the tariff. Jackson prepared to use force, and Clay and Calhoun crafted a compromise lowering the tariff.

• Against Jackson: He opposed Jackson but stood at the opposite end from Clay and Webster on state power.

• Texas: As Tyler's Secretary of State, he pushed annexation and broke the parties' silence on slavery.

Memory hook: Nationalist War Hawk, then nullifier.

How party politics in the 1830s became a way Americans talked about and sough to manage economic and social change. What principles did the rival parties enunciate? What sorts of Americans sided with Jackson on these issues and what sorts came to opposed him?

Parties as a way to manage change: The Market Revolution raised questions about banks, credit, tariffs, and internal improvements, and who should pay for them. Democrats and Whigs gave Americans two answers.

Principles

• Democrats: Limited government, hard money, opposition to the national bank and "special privilege," and "equal rights." They feared a "money power" and aristocracy, and opposed moral-reform laws.

• Whigs: Active government to foster growth and order, with a national bank, credit, tariffs, and internal improvements (Clay's American System). They feared executive tyranny ("King Andrew") and disorder, and favored moral reform.

Who sided with Jackson: Small and subsistence farmers, urban workers and artisans, debtors, and Irish, German, and Catholic immigrants. They were strong in the South, Southwest, Mid-Atlantic, and rural frontier.

Who opposed him: Merchants, manufacturers, bankers, professionals, and commercial farmers. Also evangelical Yankee Protestants, reformers, and nationalists. They were strong in New England and the Yankee-settled North.

Memory hook: Democrats feared concentrated money and power. Whigs feared disorder and tyranny.

Internal improvements

Internal improvements were government-funded roads, canals, and other transportation projects meant to link markets.

• After 1815: Calhoun and Clay pushed them as part of the Republican nationalist program. Old-school Republicans like Randolph resisted.

• Adams: He wanted big national projects, but Congress refused.

• Jackson: He vetoed the Maysville Road (1830), saying the federal government had a limited role in mostly in-state improvements.

• Clay's American System: Federal support for improvements, tariffs, and a national bank.

• Party split: Whigs backed them. Democrats favored a limited federal role.

National Republicans

The National Republicans were the supporters of John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay who opposed Jackson.

• Beliefs: Active national government, internal improvements, tariffs, and a national bank (Clay's American System).

• 1828: Adams ran as their candidate and lost to Jackson. They never built an organization as dense as Van Buren's.

• 1832: Clay was their candidate and lost to Jackson after the Bank veto.

• Later: Opposition to "King Andrew" brought them together with others into the Whigs.

Maysville Road

The Maysville Road was a Kentucky road project that Jackson vetoed in 1830.

• Jackson's reasoning: The road lay almost entirely within one state, so the federal government had a limited role in funding it.

• Target: Henry Clay of Kentucky and his American System, which called for federal support for internal improvements.

• Meaning: It showed Jackson's limited-government view on economic matters, with a preference for cheap land and low taxes.

Memory hook: Jackson vetoed a mostly in-state road to rebuke Clay.

American System

The American System was Henry Clay's program of federal support for national economic growth.

• Parts: A national bank, protective tariffs, and federal internal improvements, funded by land sales and tariffs.

• Argument: Federal help for development was constitutional under the general welfare.

• Opponents: Jacksonians saw it as unequal and preferred cheap land, agricultural expansion, and limited government. Jackson vetoed the Maysville Road in response.

• Party link: It became the core of the National Republican and later Whig platforms.

Memory hook: Clay's bank, tariff, and roads program.

Election of 1832

The Election of 1832 pitted Jackson (Democrat) against Clay (National Republican) and William Wirt (Anti-Masonic).

• Main issue: The Bank. Jackson vetoed its early recharter, and Clay ran on the American System.

• Jackson's message: Equal rights and no special privileges, with the bank held by foreigners and the wealthy.

• Anti-Masons: They saw Masons as a secret elite and won only Vermont. They held the first national party convention.

• Result: Jackson won. Clay carried his home state and a few in the Northeast.

• Aftermath: Jackson moved federal deposits to "pet banks," and opponents called him "King Andrew." In 1834 they began calling themselves Whigs.

Memory hook: The Bank was the issue, and Jackson won on "equal rights."

Anti-Masons

The Anti-Masons were a third party that saw the Masons as a secret elite conspiring against ordinary citizens.

• Origins: They grew out of the Burned-Over District of western New York.

• Beliefs: Hostility to elites and a push for moral reform.

• 1832: They won only Vermont but held the first national party convention (with a 2/3 rule).

• Legacy: Many of their evangelical reformers later joined the Whigs.

Memory hook: Burned-Over District, anti-elite, first national convention.

Jackson’s Bank veto

Jackson's Bank veto (1832) rejected an early recharter of the Second Bank of the US.

• Background: Bank president Nicholas Biddle sought an early recharter, and Clay made it a campaign issue.

• Jackson's arguments: The veto message used strict construction and states' rights. It also used class themes, since bank stock was held by foreigners and the wealthy, and "equal rights" against special privilege.

• Result: It became the central issue of 1832, and Jackson beat Clay.

• Aftermath: Jackson moved federal deposits to "pet banks," and opponents called him "King Andrew." This began the Bank War.

Memory hook: He vetoed the Bank as special privilege, then won on it.

Whigs

The Whigs were the anti-Jackson party that formed in 1834, named for English anti-monarchists.

• Origins: They united opponents of "King Andrew," including National Republicans and Anti-Masons.

• Beliefs: Active government to foster growth and order, a national bank, credit, tariffs, and internal improvements (the American System). They feared executive tyranny and disorder.

• Supporters: Merchants, manufacturers, bankers, commercial farmers, professionals, and evangelical Yankee Protestants who favored moral reform. They were strong in New England and the Yankee-settled North.

• 1836: They ran three regional candidates (Harrison, White, Webster), hoping to throw the election to the House. Van Buren still won.

• 1840: They won with William Henry Harrison.

Memory hook: The party of improvement and order against "King Andrew."

“Equal rights”

"Equal rights" was the Jacksonian rallying cry against special privilege.

• Meaning: Government should not favor the wealthy or well-connected, and should leave ordinary men alone to get ahead.

• Use: Jackson's Bank veto message argued the Bank gave privileges to foreign and wealthy stockholders.

• Policies it supported: Limited government, cheap land, low taxes, and opposition to the national bank.

• Limits: It applied to white men, and Jackson also backed Indian removal.

Memory hook: No special privileges.

Described the competition between Democrats and Whigs in the late 1830s and early 1840s, and how that represented the maturation of a second party system and the emergence of the party period in American history

The competition

• 1836: Van Buren (Democrat) beat three regional Whig candidates (Harrison, White, Webster), who hoped to throw the election to the House.

• Specie Circular (1836): Jackson's order requiring gold and silver for public land, tied to the boom and speculation before the crash.

• Panic of 1837: Americans blamed the Democrats and the Specie Circular. Democrats answered with the Independent Treasury, and a radical wing, the Loco-Focos, attacked banks and monopolies.

• 1840: The Whigs ran William Henry Harrison and made a mass appeal.

• Principles: Democrats stood for limited government, hard money, and opposition to the bank. Whigs stood for active government, the bank, credit, tariffs, and internal improvements.

Why it marks maturation and the "Party Period"

• Both parties now had real, distinct ideologies and constituencies, and competed in every region.

• The period (1830s-1890s) was marked by high turnout, strong party loyalty, and close contests.

• Both parties tried to keep slavery out of politics.

Memory hook: Panic of 1837 hurt Democrats, Whigs won in 1840, and two evenly matched parties ushered in the Party Period.

Election of 1836

The Election of 1836 was won by Martin Van Buren (Democrat), Jackson's chosen successor.

• Opposition: Whigs ran three regional candidates (Harrison, White, Webster), hoping to split the vote and throw the election to the House.

• Result: Van Buren still won.

• Issues: Jackson's legacy ("King Andrew"), the Bank, hard money, and internal improvements. Both parties kept slavery out of the campaign.

• Aftermath: The Specie Circular and the Panic of 1837 hurt Van Buren and set up the Whigs' 1840 win.

Memory hook: Three Whigs tried to beat one Democrat and failed.

Specie Circular

The Specie Circular (1836) was Jackson's order requiring gold or silver (specie) as payment for public land.

• Context: Land speculation on credit and paper money had boomed in the West after the Bank's end.

• Purpose: Curb speculation and favor hard money.

• Effect: It drained specie from the East and strained banks, contributing to the Panic of 1837.

• Politics: Democrats were blamed, which helped the Whigs in 1840.

Memory hook: Gold and silver for land, and then the crash.

Panic of 1837

The Panic of 1837 was a financial crash that began a long depression and badly hurt the Democrats.

• Causes: Land speculation on credit and paper money after the Bank's end, the Specie Circular (1836), less British investment, and crop failures.

• Blame: Americans blamed the Democrats and the Specie Circular.

• Democratic response: Van Buren proposed the Independent Treasury, keeping government funds out of banks. The radical Loco-Focos attacked banks and monopolies.

• Result: Whigs gained and won in 1840 with Harrison.

Memory hook: Speculation, specie, crash, and Whigs win in 1840.

Loco-Focos

The Loco-Focos were a radical wing of the Democratic party.

• Beliefs: They attacked banks and monopolies and favored hard money.

• Context: They emerged after the Panic of 1837, pushing the Democrats further against banks.

Memory hook: Radical, anti-bank Democrats.

Independent Treasury

The Independent Treasury was Van Buren's plan to keep federal funds in government hands, separate from banks.

• Context: Proposed after the Panic of 1837.

• Purpose: End the pet bank system and tie government finances to hard money.

• Politics: Democrats supported it as an anti-bank measure, and Whigs opposed it.

Memory hook: Government money stays out of banks.

William Henry Harrison

William Henry Harrison was a Whig leader and the ninth president.

• 1836: One of three regional Whig candidates (with White and Webster) who tried to throw the election to the House. Van Buren won.

• 1840: The Whig nominee. He ran a mass-appeal campaign and won, helped by blame on Democrats for the Panic of 1837.

• Death: He died soon after taking office, and John Tyler became president.

• Tyler: A Virginian who vetoed Whig bills and was expelled from the party, then pushed Texas annexation.

Memory hook: Lost in 1836, won in 1840, died in office, and Tyler took over.

Election of 1840

The Election of 1840 pitted Whig William Henry Harrison against President Van Buren (Democrat). Harrison won.

• Context: The Panic of 1837 and depression, which Americans blamed on the Democrats and the Specie Circular.

• Whig campaign: A mass-appeal campaign with high turnout.

• Democratic position: Van Buren defended the Independent Treasury.

• Meaning: It showed the Party Period at its height, with two evenly matched, well-organized parties.

• Aftermath: Harrison died soon after taking office, and Tyler became president.

Memory hook: Depression sank Van Buren, and Harrison won with a mass campaign.

How and why the issues of slavery intruded on politics during the 1830s and early 1840s, in spite of major parties’ efforts to sidestep it

How slavery intruded

• Abolitionism: William Lloyd Garrison demanded immediate abolition and called slavery a sin, a moral issue not to be ended by political means. Abolitionists wanted to agitate and force everyone to take a side.

• Petitions and the gag rule (1836-44): Abolitionists flooded Congress with petitions to end slavery in D.C., and Congress tabled them. This backfired by angering Northern whites over their right to petition.

• Southern defense: Southern whites felt like a minority and had to defend slavery while wanting silence. South Carolina led the defense, and nullification became a precedent.

• Texas (1840s): Tyler and Calhoun pushed annexation and broke the parties' silence. Antislavery Whigs formed the Liberty Party in 1844.

Why the parties couldn't sidestep it

• Politicians had to please voters back home, and slavery split the sections.

• Whigs were hit hardest, since their Northern and Southern wings differed.

Memory hook: Abolitionists agitated, the gag rule backfired, and Texas ended the silence.

Abolitionism

Abolitionism was the movement to end slavery, led by evangelical reformers who saw it as a sin.

• Garrison: William Lloyd Garrison demanded immediate abolition and rejected political means.

• Tactics: Agitation to force everyone to take a side, including petitions flooding Congress.

• Effects: The gag rule backfired by angering Northern whites over the right to petition. White Southerners grew defensive, and South Carolina led the defense of slavery.

• Politics: It pushed slavery into politics despite the parties' efforts to avoid it. Antislavery Whigs formed the Liberty Party in 1844.

• Roots: Part of the reform energy of the Second Great Awakening.

Memory hook: Moral agitation that forced the parties to confront slavery.

William Lloyd Garrison

William Lloyd Garrison was an evangelical abolitionist who demanded immediate emancipation.

• Beliefs: Slavery was a sin and a moral issue, not to be ended by political means.

• Tactics: Agitation to force everyone to take a side.

• Effect: His movement pushed slavery into politics, provoking Southern defensiveness and the gag rule fight.

Memory hook: Immediate abolition and moral agitation.

Nullification

Nullification was the theory that a state can declare a federal law unconstitutional and void within its borders.

• Origins: The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798), written by Madison and Jefferson, argued states could declare unconstitutional acts void.

• Nullification Crisis (1832-33): South Carolina, backed by Calhoun, tried to nullify the tariff. Jackson prepared to use force, the rest of the South didn't follow, and Clay and Calhoun crafted a compromise lowering the tariff.

• Later: It became a precedent for Southern defenders of slavery, with South Carolina leading.

Memory hook: States can void federal laws: 1798 resolutions, then South Carolina in 1832.

Gag rule

The gag rule (1836-44) was a House rule that automatically tabled antislavery petitions without debate.

• Context: Abolitionists flooded Congress with petitions, including ones to end slavery in D.C.

• Backfire: It angered Northern whites, who saw it as an attack on the right to petition.

• Effect: It made slavery a bigger political issue instead of burying it.

Memory hook: An attempt to silence abolitionists that made slavery harder to avoid.

How territorial expansion and immigration were shaping party politics by the 1840s. Why does the traditional caution with respect to expansion fade? What are the political consequences of the arrival of large numbers of Irish and German immigrants?

Why the caution about expansion faded

• Slaveholders had settled Mexican Texas, and after independence neither party wanted to annex it because of slavery. Van Buren left it alone.

• Tyler, an outcast Whig, wanted an issue and pushed annexation. Calhoun, as Secretary of State, argued that Britain would support an abolitionist Texas, and he broke the parties' silence on slavery.

• Manifest Destiny framed expansion as spreading and preserving republicanism and the small agricultural economy. Expansionists also wanted Pacific harbors and Asian markets.

Political consequences of expansion

• Van Buren and Clay opposed annexation, Southern Democrats nominated Polk (Texas and Oregon), and Clay backtracked, angering antislavery Northern Whigs.

• Those Whigs formed the Liberty Party, which likely cost Clay a key state in 1844.

• Expansion became a slavery issue.

Political consequences of Irish and German immigration

• Immigration roughly tripled in the 1840s.

• Immigrants concentrated in cities, could become citizens in five years, and some states let them vote after declaring intent.

• Nativists distrusted Catholics, cheap labor, and lack of integration, and there were cultural conflicts over alcohol and school taxes.

• Whigs leaned nativist and favored moral conformity, while Democrats defended immigrants and local control. Many Catholics became loyal Democrats.

Memory hook: Texas ended the silence on slavery, and immigration pushed Catholics into the Democratic party.

Nativism

Nativism was hostility toward immigrants, especially Irish and German Catholics, in the 1830s-40s.

• Causes: Immigration roughly tripled in the 1840s (Potato Famine, upheaval). Nativists distrusted Catholics (fear of the Pope), cheap labor, and lack of integration.

• Where: Immigrants concentrated in cities and could become citizens in five years. Some states let them vote after declaring intent.

• Conflict: Cultural clashes over alcohol and school taxes.

• Parties: Whigs leaned nativist and favored moral conformity (temperance). Democrats defended immigrants and local control, and many Catholics became loyal Democrats.

Memory hook: Whigs leaned nativist, Democrats welcomed immigrants.

Texas

Texas was a Mexican territory settled by slaveholders in the 1820s-30s, and its annexation became the central issue of 1844.

• Early caution: After independence, neither party wanted to annex Texas because of slavery. Van Buren left it alone.

• Tyler and Calhoun: Tyler, an outcast Whig, pushed annexation. Calhoun, as Secretary of State, argued that Britain would support an abolitionist Texas, and he broke the parties' silence on slavery.

• 1844: Van Buren and Clay opposed annexation, Southern Democrats nominated Polk (Texas and Oregon), Clay backtracked, and antislavery Whigs formed the Liberty Party.

• Meaning: Expansion became a slavery issue, ending the parties' caution.

Memory hook: Texas ended the silence on slavery.

Manifest Destiny

Manifest Destiny was the belief that American expansion across the continent was inevitable and good.

• Idea: Expansion spreads and preserves republicanism and the small agricultural economy.

• Other motives: Pacific harbors and markets in Asia.

• Politics: It helped erase the old caution about expansion. Tyler and Calhoun pushed Texas, and Polk ran in 1844 promising Texas and Oregon.

• Slavery: It made expansion a slavery issue, since new territory raised the question of whether slavery would spread.

Memory hook: Expansion as republican destiny, and it brought slavery into politics.

John Tyler

John Tyler was a Virginian who became president in 1841 after Harrison died in office.

• Whig outcast: He vetoed Whig bills and was expelled from the Whig party, so he wanted an issue to build support.

• Texas: He pushed annexation, and Calhoun, as his Secretary of State, argued it was needed to counter British interest in an abolitionist Texas. This broke the parties' silence on slavery.

• Effect: Texas became the central issue of 1844, when Polk won.

Memory hook: An outcast Whig who made Texas an issue.

Election of 1844

The Election of 1844 was won by James K. Polk (Democrat) over Henry Clay (Whig). Texas annexation was the main issue.

• Before the nominations: Tyler and Calhoun had pushed Texas, which broke the parties' silence on slavery. Van Buren and Clay both opposed annexation.

• Democrats: Southern Democrats blocked Van Buren and nominated Polk, who promised both Texas and Oregon.

• Whigs: Clay backtracked on Texas, angering antislavery Northern Whigs.

• Liberty Party: Those antislavery Whigs formed it, and it likely cost Clay a key state.

• Result: Polk won narrowly.

Memory hook: Polk promised Texas and Oregon, and the Liberty Party sank Clay.

Oregon Territory

The Oregon Territory was the Pacific Northwest region claimed jointly by the US and Britain in the 1840s.

• Expansion: It was part of the push for Manifest Destiny, the idea that expansion spreads and preserves republicanism.

• 1844: Polk, the Democratic nominee, promised both Texas and Oregon. This balanced the South's interest in Texas with Northern interest in Oregon.

• Aftermath: Polk later settled for the middle of Oregon (the 49th parallel), which angered Northern expansionists.

Memory hook: Texas for the South, Oregon for the North