Conspectus of the History of Political Parties and the Federal Government/Conspectus of Political History/Jackson
Jackson’s Administration.
The inaugural address of General Jackson was highly Republican, and, so far as it contained expressions of opinion, was in accordance with the views of his four predecessors. To the position taken by the state of Georgia regarding federal and state authority, the President made no allusion; he promised, however, to take care not to confound the reserved powers of the separate states with those they had granted to the confederacy.
Bank.—The first annual message of the President showed that he questioned the constitutionality and expediency of the National Bank. His aversion to this institution, afterwards, received the sanction of his party.
Removals.—President Jackson, while administering the government, removed 690 men from Federal offices, and filled the vacancies thus made with officials whose political views accorded with those of his own. The General, confident that he could conduct the government better by the aid of his friends than by the assistance of his opponents, often remarked that he was “too old a soldier to leave his garrison in the hands of his enemies.” This prescriptive policy was novel in politics, and was violently contested by the opposition.
Webster–Hayne debate.—In December, 1829, Mr. Foote, of Connecticut, introduced into the Senate a resolution, “inquiring into the expediency of suspending the sales of public lands.” The debate which followed included within its range a variety of topics, among which was that of state rights. On this subject Mr. Hayne, of South Carolina, spoke at great length, and took the position that the Federal government was not superior in authority to an individual state, and that his own state had the right to decide, on its own responsibility, a law of Congress to be unconstitutional. This startling doctrine now received the name of “nullification.” Mr. Hayne declared the intention of South Carolina to interpose her protecting power against the Federal government, whenever the latter should attempt to enforce upon her a law which she deemed unconstitutional. Daniel Webster denied the legality of nullification, and entered into an extended argument favoring the supremacy of the Federal government. The part which he took in the discussion rendered him famous, and won for him the title of “Defender of the Constitution.”
Jackson and Calhoun.—Soon after the inauguration of General Jackson, at which he expressed himself in favor of one term, Mr. Calhoun began to lay plans which would enable him to become the General’s successor. He secured the support of the Telegraph, the administration journal, and obtained the friendship of three cabinet officers. These, with his publications, sentiments, and intentions, produced a rupture between himself and the President, and occasioned a reorganization of the cabinet and the establishment of The Globe, a journal in the interests of the administration. The total renovation of the cabinet was freely denounced by the opposition and the friends of Mr. Calhoun.
The Nullification, or Calhoun party.—In 1831, after the disruption of the cabinet, Mr. Calhoun began the work of forming a party of his own. He canvassed the states of South Carolina and Georgia, endeavored to marshal the slave power against the administration, and proclaimed resistance to the tariff laws. Since nullification was the distinguishing doctrine which he taught, his organization can be called the Nullification party.
Land-proceeds.—In 1832, an attempt was made to pass a law requiring that the proceeds from the sale of public lands be distributed among the states. It was not signed by the executive, but a bill, providing for the distribution of the surplus revenue among the states, originated in the Senate, and became a law. The distribution of the land-proceeds among the states was advocated by the National Republican and the Whig party.
“To the victors belong the spoils,” is a sentiment which originated with Wm. L. Marcy, a New York senator, while arguing, in 1832, for the nomination of Martin Van Buren as minister to England. It was adopted as a maxim into the Democratic party, and has constituted, since its utterance, the code for conducting the civil service of the United States. The National Republicans adopted a resolution condemning it.
Internal improvements were sanctioned by the President in his approval of a bill which appropriated $1,200,000 for the improvement of rivers, harbors, and roads; but he failed to sanction another measure of a similar nature, known as the “harbor bill.” The system was one of the leading issues of the National Republican and Whig parties. It was supported, at first, by a large number of Democrats, but with them it gradually decreased in popularity.
Attempted recharter of the Bank.—A bill for renewing the charter of the National Bank was vetoed by the President in July, 1832.
The tariff of 1832 provided for a diminished rate per cent. on imports, and a considerable reduction of the revenue; but being an indorsement of the protective system, it met with opposition from the free-traders of South Carolina, and did not effect the conciliation expected of it.
Election of 1832.—The Anti-Masonic party held at Philadelphia, September, 1830, the first national political convention that ever assembled in the United States. According to its recommendation, the party met in convention at Baltimore, September, 1831, and nominated William Wirt and Amos Ellmaker as their candidates. The National Republican party held a national convention in the same city, December 12, 1831. Henry Clay and John Sergeant were nominated by a unanimous vote. No platform was adopted till the following May, at a ratification meeting held in Washington, when resolutions were adopted favoring a protective tariff, internal improvements, and opposing the President’s “removals,” his abuse of power, and the doctrine that “to the victors belong the spoils.” The Democratic national convention assembled at Baltimore in May, 1832, re-nominated General Jackson for President, and selected Martin Van Buren for Vice-President. Preceding the vote for the latter, it was resolved “that two-thirds of the whole number of the votes in the convention shall be necessary to constitute a choice.” This was the origin of the famous two-thirds rule. No platform of principles was adopted. The Nullification candidate was John C. Calhoun, nominated by the legislature of South Carolina. No one was indicated for the second office, and the person of the candidate was deemed sufficient without a promulgation of principles. General Jackson was re-elected, having received 219 electoral votes out of 316.
Anti-Slavery Society.—In 1833 the National Anti-Slavery Society was formed, as a result of the great interest awakened on the question of slavery two years before. Many auxiliary societies were organized throughout the northern states. The subject was openly and freely discussed; anti-slavery newspapers were soon established, and anti-slavery mail was circulated in the southern states. The opponents of slavery were called Abolitionists.
Nullification Ordinance.—Immediately after the tariff of 1832 was enacted, the congressmen of South Carolina issued an address denouncing the law, and asserting that it decreased duty on unprotected articles, and increased it on those protected. In November (1832), a convention of the people of South Carolina, acting under authority of the legislature, adopted an ordinance which declared the tariff act null and void. This was followed by a proclamation from the President, in which he pronounced against the actions of South Carolina, expounded the constitution according to the views of Webster, and expressed his determination to execute the laws of the United States. This famous proclamation accorded with the views of the people in all sections of the Union except the southern states. In South Carolina it was characterized as “the edict of a dictator.” The governor urged the people to protect the liberty of the state, and Congress empowered the President to employ the forces necessary to insure the collection of the revenue. Virginia at this juncture offered her mediation.
The tariff of 1833 was a compromise measure, brought forward by Mr. Clay to prevent the destruction of the tariff policy, to avert a civil war, and to restore peace to the country. It provided for a gradual reduction of duties till June, 1842, and put to rest the spirit of nullification.
Removal of deposits.—The law of 1816, establishing the National Bunk, ordered that the public moneys should be deposited in the vaults, and empowered the Secretary of the Treasury to remove the funds when necessary, provided he would lay before Congress his reasons for so doing. During the recess of Congress, the President determined that the revenue collectors should cease to deposit the revenues in the Bank, and that the funds remaining therein should be used to meet the current expenses of the government till the amount should be exhausted. This was termed a removal of the deposits, since it produced that result. In September, 1833, the President directed the Secretary of the Treasury to issue the necessary order. On his refusal to do so, Roger B. Taney was appointed in his stead, and, complying with the direction of the President, he designated certain banks as depositories. This act of the President was censured by the entire opposition and many of his political friends. It created great excitement throughout the country.
State banks.—When the Bank ceased to be the place for depositing the public moneys, the Democrats favored the use of state banks as depositories; this the Whigs opposed, and advocated the establishment of a sub-treasury.
Sub-treasury.—During the agitation in Congress over the bank question, a plan was proposed providing that the public moneys be placed in the custody of certain faithful agents appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The scheme was subsequently denominated the “sub-treasury.” It was advocated by the opposition during Jackson’s administration.
The Whig party.—The intense political excitement occasioned by the removal of the “deposits,” gave rise to a reconstruction of parties, which resulted in the formation of the Whig party. It was composed of the National Republicans, the Anti-Masons, most of the nullifiers, and many Democrats who denounced what they deemed the high-handed measures of the executive. [See D.]
Locofocos.—In 1835, in the city and county of New York, a portion of the Democrats organized themselves into the “Equal Rights” party. Having convened in Tammany Hall to overslaugh the proceedings of the Democratic nominating committee, they presented a chairman in opposition to the one supported by the regular Democrats. When neither party could secure the election of its chairman, the committee, in the midst of the greatest confusion, extinguished the lights. The Equal Rights men immediately relighted the room with candles and locofoco matches, with which they had provided themselves. From this they received the name of Locofocos, a designation, which was, for a time, applied to the Democratic party by the opposition.
Anti-slavery mail.—The executive, in 1835, recommended to Congress the passage of a law suppressing the circulation, by mail, of anti-slavery publications in the southern states. The Whigs opposed the law on the ground that it invaded the sanctity of private correspondence.
Texas.—In 1836 the United States acknowledged the independence of Texas. Anti-slavery men opposed the measure.
Right of petition.—A society of Friends, in 1836, petitioned Congress to remove slavery from the District of Columbia. This was followed by excited discussion concerning the right of petition. Pro-slavery men argued that petitions for the abolition of slavery should not be received.
Specie circular.—To prevent the accumulation of paper money in the treasury, the President issued his “specie circular,” which required the treasurer to receive only gold and silver in payment for lands sold. A great revulsion in business followed, and an excitement second only to that occasioned by the removal of the deposits.
Election of 1836.—The Democratic party, in national convention at Baltimore, May, 1835, confirmed the two-thirds rule, and, without adopting a platform, nominated Martin Van Buren and R. M. Johnson. The Locofocos held a counter convention in 1836, and adopted a declaration of principles. [See D. and Pl.] At a Whig convention, held at Albany, New York, and composed of delegates from that state only, William H. Harrison and Francis Granger were nominated. Resolutions favoring Harrison and opposing Van Buren were adopted. No principles were asserted. The Anti-Masons, who had not identified themselves with the Whigs, confirmed, in convention, the ticket selected at Albany. This nomination met with approval from Whig state conventions, but not without exceptions. Daniel Webster, H. L. White and William Smith were also candidates. This lack of unity weakened the efforts of the Whigs, and injured their chances of success. Van Buren was chosen by a mere popular majority.