US History AP Edition - Period 4 (1800-1848) PDF

UNIT 4 — Period 4: 1800–1848 Topic 4.1 Contextualizing Period 4 Learning Objective: Explain the context in which the republic developed from 1800 to 1848. In the first half of the 19th century, the young nation expanded economically, politically, an...

UNIT 4 — Period 4: 1800–1848 Topic 4.1 Contextualizing Period 4 Learning Objective: Explain the context in which the republic developed from 1800 to 1848. In the first half of the 19th century, the young nation expanded economically, politically, and culturally. Economically this meant taking advantage of new lands, new forms of transportation, and new industries. Politically it meant allowing more people to participate directly in their democracy. Culturally it meant developing distinctively American expressions of literature and art. In 1826, in the midst of the years covered in this period, the young nation of the United States celebrated its 50th birthday with great optimism. The founders of the country were passing on, and a new generation was taking over leadership. In this period, the leaders dealt with the challenges that accompanied the development of the young nation. Independence had been declared, a Revolutionary War won, a Constitution written and ratified, and a new government established. Between 1800 and 1848, the United States went through rapid demographic, economic, and territorial growth as the new republic worked to define itself. In 1800, the country extended from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River. By 1848, it controlled territory all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Reforms, Revivals, and Identity In response to this growth, the country reformed several institutions and practices. It expanded participation in political parties. By dropping property ownership as a requirement to vote, nearly all adult White males could cast ballots. By using nominating conventions, more people could help choose party candidates. More public school laws were enacted to educate the children. Reforms were made to prisons and asylums to make them more humane. A religious revival, an awakening, spread across the country. Much of this development of rights and reforms still excluded American Indians, African Americans, and all women. The country developed its own art, literature, and philosophy to reflect a sense of itself as independent from Europe. In this sense, the country developed a national culture. However, different sections of the country also continued to grow more distinctive. Slavery shaped a distinctively southern way of life, while the northeastern states became more focused on commerce and the Midwest region on agriculture. Topic 4.1 Contextualizing period 4 163  Markets, Farming, and Manufacturing These changes took place as a market economy emerged. People became less dependent on what they raised or made for themselves and more involved in buying and selling goods. The country benefited from the addition of fertile land farther west and advances in industry and transportation everywhere. Agriculture and manufacturing grew together, with the help of local, state, and federal governments to build roads, canals, and harbors. New technology made both farming and manufacturing more productive. The greater reliance on markets meant that more men worked away from home and women had greater control over homelife. National Strength and Signs of Division In this period, the country grew stronger and larger. Politically, President Andrew Jackson, elected in 1828 and 1832, led efforts to solidify the power of the federal government over states. In general, the United States promoted foreign trade (particularly the export of cotton) but avoided entanglement in European diplomatic affairs and wars. Efforts to improve life succeeded for many but not those enslaved. Landmarks in the institution of slavery came earlier, with the development of the cotton gin in 1793 and the end of the importation of enslaved Africans in 1808. With the territorial and economic growth, conflict with American Indians continued while rising concerns over slavery focused on whether it should be allowed in the newly acquired lands. As this period ended, most people had a positive view of a prosperous country. However, some recognized that the growing regional differences and the question of whether to allow slavery to expand into new states and territories needed to be resolved. ANALYZE THE CONTEXT 1. Explain a historical context for the development of a reform movement during this period. 2. Explain a historical context for the forces that brought about the market revolution that affected all of the people of the young nation. LANDMARK EVENTS: 1800–1848 LANDMARK EVENTS: 1800-1848 In Marbury v. The United States President Monroe The government After a heated Madison, the wins respect but warns Europeans to forces American election, the Supreme Court little else in a war stay out of Western Indians to move Federalists hand first rules a law with Great Britain. Hemisphere affairs. west on the Trail over power unconstitutional. 1812 1823 of Tears. peacefully. 1803 1838 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1803 1808 1820 1831 1848 The purchase of Congress Congress prohibits A slave revolt Advocates of Louisiana from prohibits the the expansion of led by Nat Turner women’s rights France doubles importation of slavery into the is crushed, but it gather in Seneca the country's size. enslaved people. Louisiana Territory. scares slaveowners. Falls, New York. 164 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Topic 4.2 The Rise of Political Parties and the Era of Jefferson But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1801 Learning Objective: Explain the causes and effects of policy debates in the early republic. D espite President Washington’s warning against forming political parties, two groups quickly emerged in the new republic. The Federalists, following the visions of Alexander Hamilton, and the Democratic-Republicans, espousing Thomas Jefferson’s views, competed for public approval and control of the government. The Election of 1800 During Adams’s presidency, the Federalists rapidly lost popularity. People disliked the Alien and Sedition Acts. Further, they complained about the new taxes imposed to pay for a possible war against France. Though Adams avoided war, he had persuaded Congress that building up the U.S. Navy was necessary for the nation’s defense. Establishment of Political Parties The presidential election of 1800 provided the first election with a clear choice between political parties. The Federalist Party stood for a stronger national government and leaned toward Great Britain in European affairs. The Democratic-Republican Party emphasized the powers reserved to states and leaned toward the French. Both parties supported tariffs on imports as a way to raise revenue. Throughout the 19th century, tariffs would be the largest single source of revenue for the federal government. The debate on tariffs broke down on regional lines. Northern industrialists wanted higher tariffs to protect their companies from foreign competition. Southerners relied on exports of cotton and other crops. They pushed for lower tariffs in order to encourage trade. Topic 4.2 The rise of political parties and the era of jefferson 165  Election Results Determining the winner of the 1800 presidential election was complicated. According to the original Constitution, each member of the Electoral College cast two votes for president. The winner became president, and the second-place finisher became vice president. In 1800, a majority of the presidential electors cast their ballots for two Democratic-Republicans: one for Thomas Jefferson and one for Aaron Burr. The two tied for the presidency. As the Constitution required, the House of Representatives voted to choose the winner, with each state allowed one vote. They debated and voted for days before they finally gave a majority to Jefferson. (Alexander Hamilton had urged his followers to support Jefferson, whom he considered less dangerous and of higher character than Burr.) Democratic-Republican lawmakers elected in 1800 also took control of both the House and the Senate in the elections. So the Federalists had been swept from power in both the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government. A Peaceful Revolution The passing of power in 1801 from one political party to another was accomplished without violence. This was a rare event for the times and a major indication that the U.S. constitutional system would endure the various strains that were placed upon it. The Federalists quietly accepted their defeat in the election of 1800 and peacefully relinquished control of the federal government to Jefferson’s party, the Democratic-Republicans. The change from Federalist to Democratic-Republican control is known as the Revolution of 1800. Jefferson’s Presidency During his first term, Jefferson attempted to win the allegiance and trust of Federalist opponents by maintaining the national bank and debt-repayment plan of Hamilton. In foreign policy, he carried on the neutrality policies of Washington and Adams. At the same time, Jefferson retained the loyalty of Democratic-Republican supporters by adhering to his party’s guiding principle of limited central government. He reduced the size of the military, eliminated a number of federal jobs, repealed the excise taxes—including those on whiskey— and lowered the national debt. However, hoping to avoid internal divisions that distracted Washington, he appointed only Democratic-Republicans to his cabinet. Compared to Adams’s troubled administration, Jefferson’s first four years in office were relatively free of discord. The Louisiana Purchase The single most important achievement of Jefferson’s first administration was the acquisition by purchase of vast western lands known as the Louisiana Territory. This region encompassed a large tract of western land through which the Mississippi and Missouri rivers flowed, land little explored by Europeans. At the mouth of the Mississippi lay the territory’s most valuable property in terms of commerce—the port of New Orleans. 166 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  The Louisiana Territory had once been claimed by France, which then lost its claim to Spain. But in 1800, the French military and political leader Napoleon Bonaparte secretly forced Spain to give the Louisiana Territory back to France. Napoleon hoped to restore the French empire in the Americas. By 1803, however, Napoleon had lost interest in this plan for two reasons: He wanted to concentrate French resources on fighting Great Britain A rebellion led by Toussaint Louverture against French rule on the island of Santo Domingo had resulted in heavy French losses. U.S. Interest in the Mississippi River During Jefferson’s presidency, the western frontier extended beyond Ohio and Kentucky into the Indiana Territory. Settlers in this region depended for their economic existence on transporting goods on rivers that flowed westward into the Mississippi and southward as far as New Orleans. They were greatly alarmed therefore when, in 1802, Spanish officials, who were still in charge of New Orleans, closed the port to Americans. They revoked the right of deposit granted in the Pinckney Treaty of 1795, which had allowed American farmers tax-free use of the port. People on the frontier clamored for government action. In addition to being concerned about the economic impact of the closing of New Orleans, President Jefferson was troubled by its consequences on foreign policy. He feared that so long as a foreign power controlled the river at New Orleans, the United States risked entanglement in European affairs. Negotiations Jefferson sent ministers to France with instructions to offer up to $10 million for both New Orleans and a strip of land extending from that port eastward to Florida. If the American ministers failed in their negotiations with the French, they were instructed to begin discussions with Britain for a U.S.-Britain alliance. Napoleon’s ministers, seeking funds for a war against Britain, offered to sell not only New Orleans but also the entire Louisiana Territory for $15 million. The opportunity to purchase so much land surprised American ministers. They quickly went beyond their instructions and accepted the French offer. Constitutional Predicament Jefferson and most Americans strongly approved of the Louisiana Purchase. Nevertheless, a constitutional problem troubled the president. Jefferson was committed to a strict interpretation of the Constitution and rejected Hamilton’s argument that certain powers were implied. No clause in the Constitution explicitly stated that a president could purchase foreign land. In this case, Jefferson determined to set aside his idealism for the country’s good. He submitted the purchase agreement to the Senate, arguing that lands could be added to the United States as an application of the president’s power to make treaties. Federalist senators criticized the treaty. However, casting aside the Federalist attacks, the Democratic-Republican majority in the Senate quickly ratified the purchase. Topic 4.2 The rise of political parties and the era of jefferson 167  THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE, 1803 Explorers: United States BRIT Lewis and Clark ISH Return Routes NOR Louisiana Purchase TH Pike AMER ICA 0 500 miles Land Claimed by the U.S. 0 500 kilometers BRI TIS H N ORT H AME RICA OREGON TE RR ITOR COUNTRY Y BR Mi IT ssi A ss S IS N P IS MICHIGAN H ip H pi TERRITORY Rive (1805–1816) LOUISIANA r SP INDIANA TERRITORY AN (1805–1809) iver IS St. Louis oR O hi H UNITED TE Santa Fe P U R C H A S E STATES R Albuquerque R IT O Ri o MISSISSIPPI R C L A I M E D B Y U. S. TERRITORY Y Gr (1803–1819) de an R. SPANISH FLORIDA New Orleans PACIFIC OCEAN Gulf of Mexico Consequences The Louisiana Purchase more than doubled the size of the United States, removed a European presence from the nation’s borders, and extended the western frontier to lands beyond the Mississippi. Furthermore, the acquisition of millions of acres of land strengthened Jefferson’s hopes that his country’s future would be based on an agrarian society of independent farmers rather than Hamilton’s vision of an urban and industrial society. In political terms, the Louisiana Purchase increased Jefferson’s popularity and showed the Federalists to be a weak, sectionalist (New England-based) party that could do little more than complain about Democratic-Republican policies. Lewis and Clark Expedition Even before Louisiana was purchased, Jefferson had persuaded Congress to fund a scientific exploration of the trans-Mississippi West to be led by Captain Meriwether Lewis and Lieutenant William Clark. The Louisiana Purchase greatly increased the importance of the expedition. Lewis and Clark set out from St. Louis in 1804, crossed the Rockies, reached the Oregon coast on the Pacific Ocean, and then turned back and completed the return journey in 1806. The benefits of the expedition were many: greater geographic and scientific knowledge of the region, stronger U.S. 168 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION claims to the Oregon Territory, better relations with American Indians, and more accurate maps and land routes for fur trappers and future settlers. Judicial Impeachments Jefferson tried various methods for overturning past Federalist measures and appointments. Soon after entering office, he suspended the Alien and Sedition Acts and released those jailed under them. The Federalist appointments to the courts previously made by Washington and Adams were not subject to recall or removal except by impeachment. Federalist judges therefore continued in office, much to the annoyance of the Democratic-Republican president, Jefferson. Hoping to remove partisan Federalist judges, Jefferson supported a campaign of impeachment. The judge of one federal district was found to be mentally unbalanced. The House voted for his impeachment, and the Senate then voted to remove him. The House also impeached a Supreme Court justice, Samuel Chase, but the Senate acquitted him after finding no evidence of “high crimes.” Except for these two cases, the impeachment campaign was largely a failure, as almost all the Federalist judges remained in office. Even so, the threat of impeachment caused the judges to be more cautious and less partisan in their decisions. Jefferson’s Reelection In 1804, Jefferson won reelection by an overwhelming margin, receiving all but 14 of the 176 electoral votes. His second term was marked by growing difficulties. He faced a plot by his former vice president, Aaron Burr. The Democratic-Republican Party split, with a faction (the “Quids”) accusing him of abandoning the party’s principles. Foreign troubles came from the Napoleonic wars in Europe. Aaron Burr A Democratic-Republican caucus (a closed meeting) in 1804 decided not to nominate Aaron Burr for a second term as vice president. Burr then embarked on a series of ventures, one of which threatened to break up the Union and another of which resulted in the death of Alexander Hamilton. Federalist Conspiracy Secretly forming a political pact with some radical New England Federalists, Burr planned to win the governorship of New York in 1804, unite that state with the New England states, and then lead this group of states to secede from the nation. Most Federalists followed Alexander Hamilton in opposing Burr, who was defeated in the New York election. The conspiracy then disintegrated. Duel with Hamilton Angered by an insulting remark attributed to Hamilton, Burr challenged the Federalist leader to a duel and fatally shot him. Hamilton’s death in 1804 deprived the Federalists of their last great leader and earned Burr the enmity of many. Topic 4.2 The rise of political parties and the era of jefferson 169  Trial for Treason By 1806, Burr’s intrigues had turned westward with a plan to take Mexico from Spain and possibly unite it with Louisiana under his rule. Learning of the conspiracy, Jefferson ordered Burr’s arrest and trial for treason. Presiding at the trial was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Marshall, a long-time adversary of Jefferson. A jury acquitted Burr, basing its decision on Marshall’s narrow definition of treason and the lack of witnesses to any “overt act” by Burr. John Marshall’s Supreme Court and Federal Power One Federalist official continued to have major influence throughout the years of Democratic-Republican ascendancy: John Marshall. His decisions consistently favored the central government and the rights of property against the advocates of states’ rights. John Marshall Ironically, the Federalist judge who caused Jefferson the most grief was one of his own cousins from Virginia, John Marshall. Marshall had been appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court during the final months of the presidency of John Adams. He held his post for 34 years, during which time he exerted as strong an influence on the Supreme Court as Washington had exerted on the presidency. Even when justices appointed by Democratic-Republican presidents formed a majority on the Court, they often sided with Marshall because they were persuaded that the U.S. Constitution had created a federal government with strong and flexible powers. Source: Getty Images In 1955, John Marshall became one of the first Supreme Court justices to appear on a postage stamp. It came at a time when the Supreme Court was asserting the power of the federal courts to protect individual liberties, particularly against racial discrimination and unconstitutional criminal proceedings (see Topics 8.6 and 8.11). 170 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION Influential Cases Several of Marshall’s decisions became landmarks that defined the relationship between the central government and the states. First and foremost of these was Marbury v. Madison (1803), which established the principle of judicial review. Marbury v. Madison (1803) The first major case decided by Marshall put him in direct conflict with President Jefferson. Just before leaving office, President John Adams made several “midnight appointments” of Federalists as judges. However, their commissions were not formally delivered before Jefferson took office. Jefferson wanted to block these appointments, so he ordered the new secretary of state, James Madison, not to deliver the commissions. One of the Adams appointees, William Marbury, sued for his commission. The case of Marbury v. Madison went to the Supreme Court in 1803. Marshall ruled that Marbury had a right to his commission according to the Judiciary Act passed by Congress in 1789. However, Marshall said the Judiciary Act of 1789 had given to the Court greater power than the Constitution allowed. Therefore, the law was unconstitutional and Marbury would not receive his commission. In effect, Marshall sacrificed what would have been a small Federalist gain (the appointment of Marbury) for a much larger, long-term judicial victory. By ruling a law of Congress to be unconstitutional, Marshall established the doctrine of judicial review. From this point on, the Supreme Court would exercise the power to decide whether an act of Congress or of the president was allowed by the Constitution. The Supreme Court could now overrule actions of the other two branches of the federal government. Fletcher v. Peck (1810) In a case involving land fraud in Georgia, Marshall concluded that a state could not pass legislation invalidating a contract. This was the first time that the Supreme Court declared a state law to be unconstitutional and invalid. (In Marbury v. Madison, the Court ruled a federal law unconstitutional.) Martin v. Hunter’s Lease (1816) The Supreme Court established that it had jurisdiction over state courts in cases involving constitutional rights. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) This case involved a law of New Hampshire that changed Dartmouth College from a privately chartered college into a public institution. The Marshall Court struck down the state law as unconstitutional, arguing that a contract for a private corporation could not be altered by the state. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Maryland attempted to tax the Second Bank of the United States, which was located in Maryland. Marshall ruled that a state could not tax a federal institution because “the power to tax is the power to destroy” and federal laws are supreme over state laws. In addition, Marshall settled the long-running debate over constitutionality of the national bank. Using a loose interpretation of the Constitution, Marshall ruled that, even though no clause in the Constitution specifically mentions a national bank, the Constitution gave the federal government the implied power to create one. Topic 4.2 The rise of political parties and the era of jefferson 171  Cohens v. Virginia (1821) A pair of brothers named Cohen were convicted in Virginia of illegally selling tickets for a lottery authorized by Congress for Washington, D.C. While Marshall and the Court upheld the conviction, they established the principle that the Supreme Court could review a state court’s decision involving any of the powers of the federal government. Gibbons v. Ogden (1821) Could the state of New York grant a monopoly to a steamboat company if that action conflicted with a charter authorized by Congress? In ruling that the New York monopoly was unconstitutional, Marshall established the federal government’s broad control of interstate commerce. Madison’s Presidency Jefferson believed strongly in the precedent set by Washington of voluntarily retiring from the presidency after a second term. For his party’s nomination for president, he supported his close friend, Secretary of State James Madison. The Election of 1808 Ever since leading the effort to write and ratify the Constitution, Madison was widely viewed as a brilliant thinker. He had worked tirelessly with Jefferson in developing the Democratic-Republican Party. On the other hand, he was a weak public speaker, possessed a stubborn temperament, and lacked Jefferson’s political skills. With Jefferson’s backing, Madison was nominated for president by a caucus of congressional Democratic-Republicans. Other factions of the Democratic-Republican Party nominated two other candidates. Even so, Madison was able to win a majority of electoral votes and to defeat both his Democratic-Republican opponents and the Federalist candidate, Charles Pinckney. REFLECT ON THE LEARNING OBJECTIVE 1. Explain what caused the major political disputes and the consequences of them during the early years of the new nation. KEY TERMS BY THEME Decisions (NAT, POL) Supreme Court (PCE) McCulloch v. Maryland Thomas Jefferson strict interpretation Dartmouth College v. Louisiana Purchase John Marshall Woodward Aaron Burr judicial review Gibbons v. Ogden Exploration (GEO) Marbury v. Madison implied powers Lewis and Clark Fletcher v. Peck 172 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS Questions 1–3 refer to the following excerpt. “All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.... We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.... Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1801 1. Which of the following describes a policy of Jefferson’s that reflects the attitude toward Federalists expressed in this speech? (A) He adopted a Federalist plan for increasing the size of the military. (B) He appealed to Federalists by increasing taxes to pay for new roads. (C) He attempted to gain the trust of Federalists by continuing the national bank. (D) He showed that party was unimportant by appointing some Federalists to his cabinet. 2. Jefferson’s statement that “we are all Republicans, we are all Federalists” is most directly refuted by his actions to (A) continue the neutrality policies of Adams (B) keep economic institutions established by Hamilton (C) attempt to impeach federal judges (D) purchase the Louisiana Territory 3. Jefferson’s call to avoid entangling alliances is similar to advice found in (A) the Declaration of Independence (B) The Federalist Papers (C) the Kentucky Resolutions (D) Washington’s Farewell Address Topic 4.2 The rise of political parties and the era of jefferson 173 SHORT-ANSWER QUESTION Use complete sentences; an outline or bulleted list alone is not acceptable. 1. “The issue, then, is not whether Jefferson’s policies toward Louisiana were right or wrong but rather how he managed to implement decisions that defied in so many ways his long-standing commitment to limitations on executive power and the near-sacred character of republican principles.... Jefferson was not simply seized by power-hungry impulses once he assumed the presidency, since in a broad range of other policy areas he exhibited considerable discipline over the executive branch and habitual deference to the Congress;... he did not suddenly discover a pragmatic streak in his political philosophy,... he clung tenaciously to Jeffersonian principles despite massive evidence that they were at odds with reality.... The answer would seem to be the special, indeed almost mystical place the West had in his thinking.... For Jefferson more than any other major figure in the revolutionary generation, the West was America’s future.” Joseph J. Ellis, historian, American Sphinx, 1997 “The story of the Louisiana Purchase is one of strength, of Jefferson’s adaptability and, most important, his determination to secure the territory from France,... A slower or less courageous politician might have bungled the acquisition; an overly idealistic one might have lost it by insisting on strict constitutional scruples.... The philosophical Jefferson had believed an amendment necessary. The political Jefferson, however, was not going to allow theory to get in the way of reality.... [He] expanded the powers of the executive in ways that would have likely driven Jefferson to distraction had another man been president. Much of his political life, though, had been devoted to the study and the wise exercise of power. He did what had to be done to preserve the possibility of republicanism and progress. Things were neat only in theory. And despite his love of ideas and image of himself, Thomas Jefferson was as much a man of action as he was of theory.” Jon Meacham, historian, Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power, 2012 Using the excerpts, answer (a), (b), and (c). (a) Briefly explain ONE major difference between Ellis’s and Meacham’s historical interpretations of how Thomas Jefferson came to approve the Louisiana Purchase. (b) Briefly explain how ONE historical event or development in the period 1787 to 1803 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Ellis’s interpretation. (c) Briefly explain how ONE historical event or development in the period 1787 to 1803 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Meacham’s interpretation. 174 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Topic 4.3 Politics and Regional Interests But this momentous question [the Missouri Compromise], like a firebell in the night awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it the knell of the Union. Thomas Jefferson, April 1820 Learning Objective: Explain how different regional interests affected debates about the role of the federal government in the early republic. T he election of James Monroe as president in 1816 (less than two years after the last battle of the War of 1812) inaugurated what one newspaper editorial characterized as an “Era of Good Feelings.” The term gained wide currency and was later adopted by historians to describe Monroe’s two terms in office. A closer examination of this period shows a more complicated picture. The Era of Good Feelings The period’s nickname suggests the Monroe years were marked by a spirit of nationalism, optimism, and goodwill. In some ways, they were. One party, the Federalists, faded into oblivion, and Monroe’s party, the Democratic- Republicans, adopted some of their policies and dominated politics. This perception of unity and harmony, however, can be misleading and oversimplified. Throughout the era, people had heated debates over tariffs, the national bank, internal improvements, and public land sales. Sectionalist tensions over slavery were increasing. Moreover, even a sense of party unity was illusory since antagonistic factions among Democratic-Republicans would soon split it in two. The actual period of “good feelings” may have lasted only from the election of 1816 to the Panic of 1819. James Monroe As a young man, James Monroe had fought in the Revolutionary War and suffered through the Valley Forge winter. He had become prominent in Virginia politics and had served as Jefferson’s minister to Great Britain and as Madison’s secretary of state. He continued the Virginia dynasty: of the first five presidents, four were from Virginia. The other, John Adams, was from Massachusetts. In the election of 1816, Monroe defeated the Federalist, Rufus King, overwhelmingly—183 electoral votes to 34. By 1820, the Federalist Party had practically vanished, and Monroe received every electoral vote except one. With Topic 4.3 Politics and regional interests 175 no organized political opposition, Monroe represented the growing nationalism of the American people. Under Monroe, the country acquired Florida, agreed on the Missouri Compromise, and adopted the Monroe Doctrine. Economic Nationalism One outgrowth of the War of 1812 was a political movement to support the growth of the nation’s economy. Subsidizing internal improvements (the building of roads and canals) was one aspect of the movement. Protecting budding U.S. industries from European competition was a second aspect. Often opinions on these economic issues were based on what appeared best for one’s section or region. Tariff of 1816 Before the War of 1812, Congress had levied low tariffs on imports as a method for raising government revenue. Then, during the war, manufacturers erected many factories to supply goods that previously had been imported from Britain. Now in peacetime, these American manufacturers feared that British goods would be dumped on American markets and take away much of their business. Congress raised tariffs for the express purpose of protecting U.S. manufacturers from competition rather than to simply raise revenue. This was the first protective tariff in U.S. history—the first of many to come. New England, which had little manufacturing at the time, was the only section to oppose the higher tariffs. Even the South and West, which had opposed tariffs in the past and would oppose them in the future, generally supported the 1816 tariff, believing that it was needed for national prosperity. Henry Clay’s American System Henry Clay of Kentucky, a leader in the House of Representatives, proposed a comprehensive method for advancing the nation’s economic growth. His plan, which he called the American System, consisted of three parts: (1) protective tariffs, (2) a national bank, and (3) internal improvements. Clay argued that protective tariffs would promote American manufacturing and also raise revenue with which to build a national transportation system of federally constructed roads and canals. A national bank would keep the system running smoothly by providing a national currency. The tariffs would chiefly benefit the East, internal improvements would promote growth in the West and the South, and the bank would aid the economies of all sections. Two parts of Clay’s system were already in place in 1816, the last year of James Madison’s presidency. Congress in that year adopted a protective tariff and also chartered the Second Bank of the United States. (The charter of the First Bank—Hamilton’s brainchild—had been allowed to expire in 1811.) On the matter of internal improvements, however, both Madison and Monroe objected that the Constitution did not explicitly provide for the spending of federal money on roads and canals. Throughout his presidency, Monroe consistently vetoed acts of Congress providing funds for road- building and canal-building projects. Thus, the individual states were left to make internal improvements on their own. 176 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  CANAL BUILDING, 1820 TO 1840 Values in millions of $ 1820 1830 1840 $1.1 $7.5 $14.3 $0.5 $1.0 $1.2 $4.7 $0.3 $0.8 $6.0 $8.4 South West Northeast Source: Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 The Panic of 1819 The first major financial panic since the Constitution had been ratified shook the nation in 1819. The economic disaster occurred after the Second Bank of the United States tightened credit in an effort to control inflation. Many state banks closed, and unemployment, bankruptcies, and imprisonment for debt increased sharply. The depression hit the West hardest, where many people were in debt because they had speculated on land during the euphoria after the War of 1812. In 1819, the Bank of the United States foreclosed on large amounts of western farmland. As a result of the bank panic and depression, nationalistic beliefs were shaken. In the West, the economic crisis changed many voters’ political outlook. Westerners began calling for land reform and expressing strong opposition to both the national bank and debtors’ prisons. Political Changes The Federalist Party declined rapidly because it failed to adapt as the nation grew. After opposing the War of 1812 (see Topic 4.4) and leading a secessionist convention at Hartford, the party seemed out of step with the nationalistic temper of the times. After its crushing defeat in the election of 1816, it ceased to be a national party and failed to nominate a presidential candidate in 1820. Changes in the Democratic-Republican Party Meanwhile, the Democratic-Republican Party, the only remaining national party, faced serious internal strains as it adjusted to changing times. Members such as John Randolph clung to the old party ideals of limited government and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Most members, however, adopted what had once been Federalist ideas, such as maintaining a large army and navy and supporting a national bank. Some members reversed their views from one decade to the next. For example, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts strongly opposed both the tariffs of 1816 and 1824, but then supported even higher tariff rates in 1828. John C. Calhoun of South Carolina was another Democratic-Republican leader who reversed positions. An outspoken war hawk and nationalist in 1812, Calhoun championed states’ rights after 1828. Topic 4.3 Politics and regional interests 177  Political factions and sectional differences became more intense during Monroe’s second term. When Monroe, honoring the two-term tradition, declined to be a candidate again, four other Democratic-Republicans sought election as president in 1824. How this election split the party and led to the emergence of two rival parties is explained in Topic 4.8. Western Settlement and the Missouri Compromise In the ten years after the start of the War of 1812, the population of settlers west of the Appalachian Mountains had doubled. Most went to the region between the Appalachians and the Mississippi River. Some, though, were beginning to settle in the Louisiana Territory purchased in 1803. Much of the nationalistic and economic interest in the country was centered on the West, which presented both opportunities and new questions. Reasons for Westward Movement Several factors combined to stimulate rapid growth along the western frontier during the presidencies of Madison and Monroe. Acquisition of Lands Military victories under Generals William Henry Harrison in the Indiana Territory and Andrew Jackson in Florida and the South over American Indians opened vast new territories for White settlers. Economic Pressures The economic difficulties in the Northeast from the embargo and the war caused people from this region to seek a new future across the Appalachians. In the South, tobacco planters needed new land to replace the soil exhausted by years of poor farming methods. They found good land for planting cotton in Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Improved Transportation Pioneers had an easier time reaching the frontier as a result of the building of roads and canals, steamboats, and railroads. Immigrants More Europeans were being attracted to America by speculators offering cheap land in the Great Lakes region and in the valleys of the Ohio, Cumberland, and Mississippi rivers. New Questions and Issues Despite their rapid growth, the new states of the West were small relative to those of the other two sections. To enhance their limited political influence in Congress, western representatives bargained with politicians from other sections. The primary concerns of the western states were as follows: (1) “cheap money” (easy credit) from state banks rather than from the Bank of the United States, (2) low prices for land sold by the federal government, and (3) improved transportation. However, on the critical issue of slavery, westerners disagreed over permitting it. Those settling territory to the south wanted slavery for economic reasons (labor for the cotton fields), while those settling to the north had no use for slavery. In 1819, when the Missouri Territory applied to Congress for statehood, the slavery issue became a subject of angry debate. 178 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION The Missouri Compromise Ever since 1791–1792, when Vermont entered the Union as a free state and Kentucky entered as a slave state, politicians in Congress had attempted to preserve a sectional balance between the North and the South. Keeping a balance in the House of Representatives was difficult because the population in the North was growing more rapidly than in the South. By 1818, the northern states held a majority of 105 to 81 in the House. However, in the Senate, the votes remained divided evenly: 11 slave states and 11 free states. As long as this balance was preserved, southern senators could block legislation that they believed threatened the interests of their section. Missouri’s bid for statehood alarmed the North because slavery was well established there. If Missouri came in as a slave state, it would tip the political balance in the South’s favor. Furthermore, Missouri was the first part of the Louisiana Purchase to apply for statehood. Southerners and northerners alike worried about the future status of other new territories applying for statehood from the rest of the vast Louisiana Purchase. Tallmadge Amendment Representative James Tallmadge from New York ignited the debate about the Missouri question by proposing an amendment to the bill for Missouri’s admission. The amendment called for (1) prohibiting the further introduction of slaves into Missouri and (2) requiring the children of Missouri slaves to be emancipated at the age of 25. If adopted, the Tallmadge Amendment would have led to the gradual elimination of slavery in Missouri. The amendment was defeated in the Senate as enraged southerners saw it as the first step in a northern effort to abolish slavery in all states. THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE B R I T I S H P O S S E S S I O N S MAINE (1820) FREE MICHIGAN OREGON COUNTRY UNORGANIZED TERRITORY TERRITORY U N I T E D S T A T E S MISSOURI (1821) 36° 30' SLAVE ARKANSAS TERRITORY ATLANTIC M E X I C O OCEAN (independent 1821) FLORIDA TERRITORY (ceded by Spain 1819) Gulf of Open to slavery Mexico Closed to slavery 0 500 Miles 0 500 Kilometers PACIFIC OCEAN Topic 4.3 Politics and regional interests 179  Clay’s Proposals After months of heated debate in Congress and throughout the nation, Henry Clay won majority support for three bills that, taken together, represented a compromise: 1. admit Missouri as a slave-holding state 2. admit Maine as a free state 3. prohibit slavery in the rest of the Louisiana Territory north of latitude 36° 30΄ Both houses passed the bills, and President Monroe added his signature in March 1820 to what became known as the Missouri Compromise. Aftermath Sectional feelings on the slavery issue subsided after 1820. The Missouri Compromise preserved sectional balance for more than 30 years and provided time for the nation to mature. Nevertheless, if an era of good feelings existed, it was badly damaged by the storm of sectional controversy over Missouri. After this political crisis, Americans were torn between feelings of nationalism (loyalty to the Union) on the one hand and feelings of sectionalism (loyalty to one’s own region) on the other. REFLECT ON THE LEARNING OBJECTIVE 1. Explain how the viewpoints from the different sections of the new republic impacted the discussion of the role of the Federal government. KEY TERMS BY THEME Public Confidence (NAT) Industry (WXT) Second Bank of the United Era of Good Feelings Tariff of 1816 States James Monroe protective tariff Panic of 1819 economic nationalism Henry Clay Making the Law (POL) sectionalism American System Tallmadge Amendment Missouri Compromise (1820) MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS Questions 1–3 refer to the following excerpt. “It is hushed indeed for the moment. but this [Missouri Compromise] is a reprieve only, not a final sentence. a geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper. I can say with conscious truth that there is not a man on earth who would sacrifice more than I would, to relieve us 180 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  from this heavy reproach, in any practicable way.... to regulate the condition of the different descriptions of men composing a state. This certainly is the exclusive right of every state, which nothing in the constitution has taken from them and given to the general government.” Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Holmes, April 22, 1820 1. Which of the following provided a precedent on the issue described by Jefferson that was reflected in the Missouri Compromise? (A) The Declaration of Independence, which declared all men equal (B) The Articles of Confederation, which did not allow the national government to tax individuals (C) The Northwest Ordinance, which limited the expansion of slavery (D) The Louisiana Purchase, which showed how the federal government could expand its power 2. Which of the following was most necessary for the passage of the Missouri Compromise? (A) Admission of Maine as a free state (B) Support from John Quincy Adams (C) Adding the Tallmadge Amendment (D) A unified Democratic-Republican Party 3. Which of the following groups would most strongly agree with Jefferson’s views about the future impact of the Missouri Compromise? (A) Federalists calling for a stronger national government (B) Abolitionists demanding an immediate end to slavery (C) Democratic-Republicans recognizing the need for more compromises (D) Settlers in the Louisiana Territory seeking more land SHORT-ANSWER QUESTION Use complete sentences; an outline or bulleted list alone is not acceptable. 1. Answer (a), (b), and (c). (a) Briefly explain ONE specific part of Henry Clay's proposed American System. (b) Briefly explain why ONE region favored the American System during the period from 1800 to 1848. (c) Briefly explain why ONE region opposed the American System during the period from 1800 to 1848. Topic 4.3 Politics and regional interests 181  Topic 4.4 America on the World Stage The war has renewed and reinstated the national feelings and character which the Revolution had given, and which were daily lessened.... I hope the permanency of the Union is thereby better secured. Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin, 1816 Learning Objective: Explain how and why American foreign policy developed over time. F rom their founding as colonies to their fight for independence, the United States was strongly influenced by the actions of other nations. Even President Washington had to deal with foreign “entanglements” (see Topic 3.10) likely leading to his warning against “permanent alliances” in foreign affairs. Jefferson’s Foreign Policy President Jefferson brought considerable experience in dealing with foreign affairs. He had served as a foreign minister in Europe and secretary of state prior to his election in 1800. This experience led to success with the Louisiana Purchase but would be challenged by numerous other foreign affairs questions. Difficulties Abroad As a matter of policy and principle, Jefferson tried to avoid war. Rejecting permanent alliances, he sought to maintain U.S. neutrality despite increasing provocations from both France and Britain during the Napoleonic wars. Barbary Pirates The first major challenge to Jefferson’s foreign policy came not from a major European power but from the piracy practiced by the Barbary states on the North African coast. To protect U.S. merchant ships from being seized by Barbary pirates, Presidents Washington and Adams had reluctantly agreed to pay tribute to the Barbary governments. The ruler of Tripoli demanded a higher sum in tribute from Jefferson. Refusing to pay, Jefferson sent a small fleet of the U.S. Navy to the Mediterranean. Sporadic fighting with Tripoli lasted for four years (1801–1805). Although the American navy did not achieve a decisive victory, it did gain some respect and offered a measure of protection to U.S. vessels trading in Mediterranean waters. Challenges to U.S. Neutrality Meanwhile, the Napoleonic wars continued to dominate the politics of Europe—and to shape the commercial economy of 182 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION the United States. The two principal belligerents, France and Britain, attempted naval blockades of enemy ports. They regularly seized the ships of neutral nations and confiscated their cargoes. The chief offender from the U.S. point of view was Britain, since its navy dominated the Atlantic. Most infuriating was the British practice of capturing U.S. sailors who it claimed were British citizens and impressing (forcing) them to serve in the British navy. Chesapeake-Leopard Affair One incident at sea especially aroused American anger and almost led to war. In 1807, only a few miles off the coast of Virginia, the British warship Leopard fired on the U.S. warship Chesapeake. Three Americans were killed, and four others were taken captive and impressed into the British navy. Anti-British feeling ran high, and many Americans demanded war. Jefferson, however, resorted to diplomacy and economic pressure as his response to the crisis. Embargo Act (1807) As an alternative to war, Jefferson persuaded the Democratic-Republican majority in Congress to pass the Embargo Act in 1807. This measure prohibited American merchant ships from sailing to any foreign port. Since the United States was Britain’s largest trading partner, Jefferson hoped that the British would stop violating the rights of neutral nations rather than lose U.S. trade. The embargo, however, backfired and brought greater economic hardship to the United States than to Britain. The British were determined to control the seas at all costs, and they had little difficulty substituting supplies from South America for U.S. goods. The embargo’s effect on the U.S. economy, however, was devastating, especially for the merchant marine and shipbuilders of New England. So bad was the depression that a movement developed in the New England states to secede from the Union. Recognizing that the Embargo Act had failed, Jefferson called for its repeal in 1809 during the final days of his presidency. Even after repeal, however, U.S. ships could trade legally with all nations except Britain and France. President Madison’s Foreign Policy Madison’s presidency was dominated by the same European problems that had plagued Jefferson’s second term. Commercial Warfare Like Jefferson, Madison attempted a combination of diplomacy and economic pressure to deal with the Napoleonic wars. Unlike Jefferson, he finally consented to take the United States to war. Nonintercourse Act of 1809 After the repeal of Jefferson’s disastrous embargo act, Madison hoped to end economic hardship while maintaining his country’s rights as a neutral nation. The Nonintercourse Act of 1809 provided that Americans could now trade with all nations except Britain and France. Topic 4.4 America on the world stage 183  FOREIGN TRADE, 1805 TO 1817 200 Imports Value in millions of dollars 175 Exports 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 Year Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 Macon’s Bill No. 2 (1810) Economic hardships continued into 1810. Nathaniel Macon, a member of Congress, introduced a bill that restored U.S. trade with Britain and France. Macon’s Bill No. 2 provided, however, that if either Britain or France formally agreed to respect U.S. neutral rights at sea, then the United States would prohibit trade with that nation’s foe. Napoleon’s Deception Upon hearing of Congress’s action, Napoleon announced his intention of revoking the decrees that had violated U.S. neutral rights. Taking Napoleon at his word, Madison carried out the terms of Macon’s Bill No. 2 by embargoing U.S. trade with Britain in 1811. However, he soon realized that Napoleon had no intention of fulfilling his promise. The French continued to seize American merchant ships. The War of 1812 Neither Britain nor the United States wanted their dispute to end in war. And yet war between them did break out in 1812. Causes of the War From the U.S. point of view, the pressures leading to war came from two directions: the continued violation of U.S. neutral rights at sea and troubles with the British on the western frontier. Free Seas and Trade As a trading nation, the United States depended upon the free flow of shipping across the Atlantic. Yet the chief belligerents in Europe, Britain, and France had no interest in respecting neutral rights so long as they were locked in a life-and-death struggle with one another. They well remembered that Britain had seemed a cruel enemy during the American Revolution and the French had supported the colonists. In addition, Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans applauded the French for having overthrown their monarchy in their own revolution. Moreover, even though both the French and the British violated U.S. neutral rights, the British violations were worse because of the British navy’s practice of impressing American sailors. 184 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Frontier Pressures Added to long-standing grievances over British actions at sea were the ambitions of western Americans for more land. Americans on the frontier longed for the lands of British Canada and Spanish Florida. Standing in the way were the British and their Indian and Spanish allies. Conflict with the American Indians was a perennial problem for the restless westerners. For decades, settlers had been gradually pushing the American Indians farther and farther westward. In an effort to defend their lands from further encroachment, Shawnee brothers—a warrior named Tecumseh and a religious leader known as the Prophet—attempted to unite all of the tribes east of the Mississippi River. White settlers became suspicious of Tecumseh and persuaded the governor of the Indiana Territory, General William Henry Harrison, to take aggressive action. In the Battle of Tippecanoe, in 1811, Harrison destroyed the Shawnee headquarters, which ended Tecumseh’s efforts to form an Indian confederacy. The British had provided only a little aid to Tecumseh. Nevertheless, Americans on the frontier blamed the British for instigating the rebellion. War Hawks A congressional election in 1810 had brought a group of new, young Democratic-Republicans to Congress, many of them from frontier states (Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio). Known as war hawks because of their eagerness for war with Britain, they quickly gained significant influence in the House of Representatives. Led by Henry Clay of Kentucky and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, the war hawk members of Congress argued that war with Britain would be the only way to defend American honor, gain Canada, and destroy American Indian resistance on the frontier. Declaration of War British delays in meeting U.S. demands over neutral rights combined with political pressures from the war hawks finally persuaded Madison to seek a declaration of war against Britain. Ironically, the British government had by this time (June 1812) agreed to suspend its naval blockade. News of its decision reached the White House after Congress had declared war. A Divided Nation Neither Congress nor the American people were united in support of the war. In Congress, Pennsylvania and Vermont joined the southern and western states to provide a slight majority for the war declaration. Voting against the war were most representatives from New York, New Jersey, and New England. Election of 1812 A similar division of opinion was seen in the presidential election of 1812, in which Democratic-Republican strength in the South and West overcame Federalist and antiwar Democratic-Republican opposition to war in the North. Madison won reelection, defeating De Witt Clinton of New York, the candidate of the Federalists and antiwar Democratic-Republicans. Topic 4.4 America on the world stage 185  VOTE ON DECLARING WAR IN 1812 Yes No Not voting or unsettled Opposition to the War Americans who opposed the war viewed it as “Mr. Madison’s War” and the work of the war hawks in Congress. Most outspoken in their criticism of the war were New England merchants, Federalist politicians, and “Quids,” or “Old” Democratic-Republicans. New England merchants were opposed because, after the repeal of the Embargo Act, they were making sizable profits from the European war and viewed impressment as merely a minor inconvenience. Both commercial interests and religious ties to Protestantism made them more sympathetic to the Protestant British than to the Catholic French. Federalist politicians viewed the war as a Democratic-Republican scheme to conquer Canada and Florida, with the ultimate aim of increasing Democratic-Republican voting strength. For their part, the “Quids” criticized the war because it violated the classic Democratic-Republican commitment to limited federal power and to the maintenance of peace. Military Defeats and Naval Victories Facing Britain’s overwhelming naval power, Madison’s military strategists based their hope for victory on (1) Napoleon’s continued success in Europe and (2) a U.S. land campaign against Canada. Invasion of Canada A poorly equipped American army initiated military action in 1812 by launching a three-part invasion of Canada, one force starting out from Detroit, another from Niagara, and a third from Lake Champlain. These and later forays into Canada were easily repulsed by the British defenders. An American raid and burning of government buildings in York (Toronto) in 1813 only served to encourage retaliation by the British. 186 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Naval Battles The U.S. navy achieved some notable victories due largely to superior shipbuilding and the valorous deeds of American sailors, including many free African Americans. In late 1812, the U.S. warship Constitution (nicknamed “Old Ironsides”) raised American morale by defeating and sinking a British ship off the coast of Nova Scotia. American privateers, motivated by both patriotism and profit, captured numerous British merchant ships. Offsetting these gains was the success of the British navy in establishing a blockade of the U.S. coast, which crippled trading and fishing. Probably the most important naval battle of the war was in 1813 on Lake Erie with American Captain Oliver Hazard Perry, declaring victory with, “We have met the enemy and they are ours.” This led the way for General William Henry Harrison’s victory at the Battle of the Thames (near Detroit), in which Tecumseh was killed. The next year, 1814, ships commanded by Thomas Macdonough defeated a British fleet on Lake Champlain. As a result, the British had to retreat and abandon their plan to invade New York and New England. Chesapeake Campaign By the spring of 1814, the defeat of Napoleon in Europe enabled the British to increase their forces in North America. In the summer of that year, a British army marched through the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., and set fire to the White House, the Capitol, and other government buildings. The British also attempted to take Baltimore, but Fort McHenry held out after a night’s bombardment—an event immortalized by Francis Scott Key in the words of “The Star-Spangled Banner.” Southern Campaign Meanwhile, U.S. troops in the South were ably commanded by General Andrew Jackson. In March 1814, at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in present-day Alabama, Jackson ended the power of an important British ally, the Creek nation. The victory eliminated the Indians and opened new lands to White settlers. A British effort to control the Mississippi River was halted at New Orleans by Jackson leading a force of frontier soldiers, free African Americans, and Creoles. The victory was impressive—but also meaningless. The Battle of New Orleans was fought on January 8, 1815, two weeks after a treaty ending the war had been signed in Ghent, Belgium, but before news of the treaty had reached the military forces. The Treaty of Ghent By 1814, the British were weary of war. Having fought Napoleon for more than a decade, they now faced the prospect of maintaining the peace in Europe. At the same time, Madison’s government recognized that the Americans would be unable to win a decisive victory. American peace commissioners traveled to Ghent, Belgium, to discuss terms of peace with British diplomats. On Christmas Eve 1814, an agreement was reached. The terms halted fighting, returned all conquered territory to the prewar claimant, and recognized the prewar boundary between Canada and the United States. Topic 4.4 America on the world stage 187  The Treaty of Ghent, promptly ratified by the Senate in 1815, said nothing at all about the grievances that led to war. Britain made no concessions concerning impressment, blockades, or other maritime differences. Thus, the war ended in stalemate with no gain for either side. The Hartford Convention Just before the war ended, the New England states threatened to secede from the Union. Bitterly opposed to both the war and the Democratic-Republican government in Washington, radical Federalists in New England urged that the Constitution be amended and that, as a last resort, secession be voted upon. To consider these matters, a special convention was held at Hartford, Connecticut, in December 1814. Delegates from the New England states rejected the radical calls for secession. But to limit the growing power of the Democratic- Republicans in the South and West, they adopted a number of proposals. One of them called for a two-thirds vote of both houses for any future declaration of war. Shortly after the convention dissolved, news came of both Jackson’s victory at New Orleans and the Treaty of Ghent. These events ended criticism of the war and further weakened the Federalists by stamping them as unpatriotic. The War’s Legacy From Madison’s point of view, the war achieved none of its original aims. Nevertheless, it had a number of important consequences for the future development of the American republic, including the following: 1. Having survived two wars with Britain, the United States gained the respect of other nations. 2. The United States accepted Canada as a part of the British Empire. 3. Denounced for its talk of secession, the Federalist Party came to an end as a national force and declined even in New England. 4. Talk of nullification and secession in New England set a precedent that would later be used by the South. 5. Abandoned by the British, American Indians were forced to surrender land to White settlement. 6. With the British naval blockade limiting European goods, U.S. factories were built and Americans moved toward industrial self-sufficiency. 7. War heroes such as Andrew Jackson and William Henry Harrison would soon be in the forefront of a new generation of political leaders. 8. The feeling of nationalism grew stronger as did a belief that the future for the United States lay in the West and away from Europe. 188 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION Monroe and Foreign Affairs Following the War of 1812, the United States adopted a more aggressive, nationalistic approach in its relations with other nations. During Madison’s presidency, when problems with the Barbary pirates again developed, a fleet under Stephen Decatur was sent in 1815 to force the rulers of North Africa to allow American shipping the free use of the Mediterranean. President Monroe and Secretary of State John Quincy Adams continued to follow a nationalistic policy that actively advanced American interests while maintaining peace. Canada Although the Treaty of Ghent of 1814 had ended the war between Britain and the United States, it left unresolved most of their diplomatic differences, including many involving Canada. Rush-Bagot Agreement (1817) During Monroe’s first year as president, British and American negotiators agreed to a major disarmament pact. The Rush-Bagot Agreement strictly limited naval armament on the Great Lakes. In time, the agreement was extended to place limits on border fortifications as well. Ultimately, the border between the United States and Canada was to become the longest unfortified border in the world. Treaty of 1818 Improved relations between the United States and Britain continued in a treaty that provided for (1) shared fishing rights off the coast of Newfoundland; (2) joint occupation of the Oregon Territory for ten years; and (3) the setting of the northern limits of the Louisiana Territory at the 49th parallel, thus establishing the western U.S.-Canada boundary line. Florida During the War of 1812, U.S. troops had occupied western Florida, a strip of land on the Gulf of Mexico extending all the way to the Mississippi Delta. Previously, this land had been held by Spain, Britain’s ally. After the war, Spain had difficulty governing the rest of Florida (the peninsula itself) because its troops had been removed from Florida to battle revolts in the South American colonies. The chaotic conditions permitted groups of Seminoles, runaway slaves, and White outlaws to conduct raids into U.S. territory and retreat to safety across the Florida border. These disorders gave Monroe and General Andrew Jackson an opportunity to take military action in Spanish Florida, a territory long coveted by American expansionists. Jackson’s Military Campaign In late 1817, the president commissioned General Jackson to stop the raiders and, if necessary, pursue them across the border into Spanish west Florida. Jackson carried out his orders with a vengeance and probably went beyond his instructions. In 1818, he led a force of militia into Florida, destroyed Seminole villages, and hanged two Seminole chiefs. Capturing Pensacola, Jackson drove out the Spanish governor and hanged two British traders accused of aiding the Seminoles. Topic 4.4 America on the world stage 189  Many members of Congress feared that Jackson’s overzealousness would precipitate a war with both Spain and Britain. However, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams persuaded Monroe to support Jackson, and the British decided not to intervene. Florida Purchase Treaty (1819) Spain, worried that the United States would seize Florida and preoccupied with troubles in Latin America, decided to get the best possible terms for Florida. By treaty in 1819, Spain turned over all of its possessions in Florida and its own claims in the Oregon Territory to the United States. In exchange, the United States agreed to assume $5 million in claims against Spain and give up any U.S. territorial claims to the Spanish province of Texas. The agreement is also called the Adams-Onís Treaty. The Monroe Doctrine Although focused on its own growth, the United States did not ignore the ambitions of Europe in the Western Hemisphere. The restoration of a number of monarchies in Europe after the fall of Napoleon in 1815 produced a backlash against republican movements. Restored monarchies in France, Austria, and Prussia, together with Russia, worked together to suppress liberal elements in Italy and Spain. They also considered helping Spain to return to power in South America, where a number of republics had recently declared their independence. In addition, Russia’s presence in Alaska worried both Britain and the United States. Using their trading posts in Alaska as a base, Russian seal hunters had spread southward and established a trading post at San Francisco Bay. British and U.S. leaders decided they had a common interest in protecting North and South America from possible aggression by a European power. British Initiative British naval power deterred the Spanish from attempting a comeback in Latin America. But to maintain British trade with the Latin American republics required diplomacy. British Foreign Secretary George Canning proposed to Richard Rush, the U.S. minister in London, a joint Anglo-American warning to the European powers not to intervene in South America. American Response Monroe and most of his advisers thought Canning’s idea of a joint declaration made sense. However, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams disagreed. He believed that joint action with Britain would restrict U.S. opportunities for further expansion in the hemisphere. Adams reasoned as follows: (1) If the United States acted alone, Britain could be counted upon to stand behind the U.S. policy; (2) No European power would risk going to war in South America, and if it did, the British navy would surely defeat the aggressor. President Monroe decided to act as Adams advised—to issue a statement to the world that did not have Britain as a coauthor. The Doctrine On December 2, 1823, President Monroe inserted into his annual message to Congress a declaration of U.S. policy toward Europe and Latin America. The Monroe Doctrine, as it came to be called, asserted “as a 190 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.” Monroe declared further that the United States opposed attempts by a European power to interfere in the affairs of any republic in the Western Hemisphere. Impact Monroe’s bold words of nationalistic purpose were applauded by the American public but were soon forgotten, as most citizens were more concerned with domestic issues. In Britain, Canning was annoyed by the doctrine because he recognized that it applied not just to the other European powers but to his country as well. The British, too, were warned not to intervene and not to seek new territory in the Western Hemisphere. The European monarchs reacted angrily to Monroe’s message. Still, they recognized that their purposes were thwarted not by his words but by the might of the British navy. The Monroe Doctrine had less significance at the time than in later decades, when it would be hailed by politicians and citizens alike as the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America. In the 1840s, President James Polk was the first of many presidents to justify his foreign policy by referring to Monroe’s warning words. REFLECT ON THE LEARNING OBJECTIVE 1. Explain the reasons and ways that American foreign policy changed during this period. KEY TERMS BY THEME Support (NAT, POL) neutrality Creek nation war hawks impressment Battle of New Orleans Henry Clay Chesapeake-Leopard affair Treaty of Ghent (1814) John C. Calhoun Embargo Act (1807) Foreign Affairs (WOR) Opposition (POL) James Madison Stephen Decatur “Quids” Nonintercourse Act (1809) Rush-Bagot Agreement Hartford Convention (1814) Macon’s Bill No. 2 (1810) (1817) War of 1812 Treaty of 1818 The West (MIG, ARC) “Old Ironsides” Andrew Jackson Tecumseh Battle of Lake Erie Florida Purchase Treaty Prophet Oliver Hazard Perry (1819) William Henry Harrison Battle of the Thames Monroe Doctrine (1823) Battle of Tippecanoe Thomas Macdonough The Anthem (SOC) War (WOR) Battle of Lake Champlain Francis Scott Key Napoleon Bonaparte Andrew Jackson “The Star-Spangled Barbary pirates Battle of Horseshoe Bend Banner” Topic 4.4 America on the world stage 191 MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS Questions 1–3 refer to the following excerpt. “I am ready to allow, Mr. President, that both Great Britain and France have given us abundant cause for war.... My plan would be, and my first wish is, to prepare for it—to put the country in complete armor—in the attitude imperiously demanded in a crisis of war, and to which it must be brought before any war can be effective.... I must call on every member of this Senate to pause before he leaps into or crosses the Rubicon [Roman leader Julius Caesar touched off a war in 49 BCE when he and his troops crossed the Rubicon River]—declaring war is passing the Rubicon in reality.” Senator Obadiah German of New York, speech in the Senate, June 1812 1. Support for the War of 1812 was the strongest among (A) frontier settlers who wanted more land from American Indians (B) New England merchants who feared impressment (C) Protestants who had religious sympathies with Great Britain (D) the Democratic-Republicans who most emphasized states’ rights 2. Who would be most likely to agree with German’s Rubicon reference? (A) John Calhoun and other politicians from the South (B) Henry Clay and other politicians from the West (C) Officials from the executive branch (D) Merchants from New England 3. Which of the following is the best support for German’s claim that the United States had “abundant cause for war”? (A) The impressment of U.S. sailors (B) The controversy over the Louisiana Purchase (C) The actions by the Barbary pirates (D) The findings of the Lewis and Clark expedition SHORT-ANSWER QUESTION 1. Answer (a), (b), and (c). (a) Briefly explain how ONE specific event or historical development was used by supporters of going to war against Britain in 1812. (b) Briefly explain how ONE specific event or historical development was used by opponents of going to war against Britain in 1812. (c) Briefly explain how ONE reason for or against the War of 1812 played a major role in U.S. politics and policies after the war. 192 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Topic 4.5 Market Revolution I never thought my cotton gin would change history. Eli Whitney (1765–1825) Learning Objective: Explain the causes and effects of the innovations in technology, agriculture, and commerce over time. In the early 1800s, the Jeffersonian dream of a nation of independent farmers remained strong in rural areas. Innovations and new technology in the 19th century would steadily decrease the demand for people working in agriculture and increase the demand for people working in commerce. Ironically, Jefferson, a father of a political revolution, would see his ideal nation of small farmers overwhelmed by an economic revolution based on new knowledge. As the 19th century progressed, an increasing percentage of the American people were swept up in the dynamic economic changes of the Industrial Revolution. Political conflicts over tariffs, internal improvements, and the Bank of the United States (see Topics 4.3 and 4.8) reflected the importance to people’s lives of a national economy that was rapidly growing. Development of the Northwest The Old Northwest consisted of six states that joined the Union before 1860: Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan (1837), Wisconsin (1848), and Minnesota (1858). These states came from territories formed out of land ceded to the national government in the 1780s by one of the original 13 states. The procedure for turning these territories into states was part of the Northwest Ordinance passed by Congress in 1787 (see Topics 3.7 and 3.12). In the early years of the 19th century, much of the Old Northwest was unsettled frontier and the part of it that was settled relied upon the Mississippi to transport grain to southern markets and the port of New Orleans. By mid- century, however, this region became closely tied to the other northern states by two factors: (1) military campaigns by federal troops that drove American Indians from the land and (2) the building of canals and railroads that established common markets between the Great Lakes and the East Coast. Agriculture In the Old Northwest, corn and wheat were very profitable and fed people in growing urban areas. Using the newly invented steel plow (by John Deere) and mechanical reaper (by Cyrus McCormick), a farm family was more efficient and could plant more acres, needing to supplement its labor Topic 4.5 Market revolution 193 only with a few hired workers at harvest time. Part of the crop was used to feed cattle and hogs and also to supply distillers and brewers with grain for making whiskey and beer. Farmers shipped grain quickly to cities to avoid spoilage. Transportation Vital to the development of both a national and an industrial economy was an efficient network of interconnecting roads and canals for moving people, raw materials, and manufactured goods. Roads Pennsylvania’s Lancaster Turnpike, built in the 1790s, connected Philadelphia with the rich farmlands around Lancaster. Its success stimulated the construction of other privately built and relatively short toll roads that, by the mid-1820s, connected most of the country’s major cities. Despite the need for interstate roads, states’ rights advocates blocked the spending of federal funds on internal improvements. Construction of highways that crossed state lines was therefore unusual. One notable exception was the National, or Cumberland Road, a paved highway and major route to the west extending more than a thousand miles from Maryland to Illinois. It was begun in 1811 and completed in the 1850s, using both federal and state money, with the different states receiving ownership of segments of the highway. Canals The completion of the Erie Canal in New York State in 1825 was a major event in linking the economies of western farms and eastern cities. The success of this canal in stimulating economic growth touched off a frenzy of canal building in other states. In little more than a decade, canals joined together all of the major lakes and rivers east of the Mississippi. Improved transportation meant lower food prices in the East, more immigrants settling in the West, and stronger economic ties between the two sections. Steam Engines and Steamboats The development of steam-powered engines in the 18th century revolutionized the location of factories. When factories ran on the power of moving water, they had to be located on a stream. However, a steam engine could be set up anywhere—in mills, mines, and factories. They first became widely used in Great Britain, but they spread to the United States in the 19th century. The age of mechanized, steam-powered travel began in 1807 with the successful voyage up the Hudson River of the Clermont, a steamboat developed by Robert Fulton. Early steamboats could travel upriver at speeds of almost five miles per hour. Commercially operated steamboat lines soon made round-trip shipping on the nation’s great rivers both faster and cheaper. Hauling freight from Cincinnati to New York took more than seven weeks before the days of steamboats and canals. After, it took less than three weeks. Railroads Even more rapid and reliable links between cities became possible with the building of the first U.S. railroad lines in the late 1820s. The early railroads were hampered at first by safety problems, but by the 1830s, they were competing directly with canals as an alternative method for carrying passengers and freight. The combination of railroads with the other major 194 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION improvements in transportation rapidly changed small western towns such as Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, and Chicago into booming commercial centers of the expanding national economy. These improvements in transportation linked the regions of the North and the Midwest, as people in growing cities in Massachusetts and New York purchased much-needed wheat and corn raised in Ohio, Illinois, and states farther west. However, railroads were less common in the South, which continued to rely on rivers more than rails. Communication Changes in transportation brought the country closer together. But it could travel only as fast as ships could sail and horses could run. In 1844, inventor Samuel F. B. Morse demonstrated a successful telegraph, which transmitted messages along wires almost instantaneously. As wires were strung around the country, often along railroad tracks and later under oceans, for the first time in human history, people were able to communicate as fast as electricity could travel. Suddenly, managers in New York City, government officials in Washington, D.C., and military leaders in headquarters could direct people dozens, hundreds, or thousands of miles away more easily than ever before. Source: Getty Images Telegraphs used a system of short and long signals (dots and dashes) to send messages. The chart above provided a visual way to learn the code for each letter, asserting that people who studied it could learn the code in one hour or less. Growth of Industry At the start of the 19th century, a manufacturing economy had barely begun in the United States. By mid-century, however, U.S. manufacturing surpassed agriculture in value, and by century’s end, it was the world’s leader. This rapid industrial growth was the result of a unique combination of factors. Topic 4.5 Market revolution 195  Mechanical Inventions Protected by patent laws, inventors looked forward to handsome rewards if their ideas for new tools or machines proved practical. Eli Whitney, who had developed the cotton gin in 1793 (see Topic 3.12), was only the most famous of hundreds of Americans whose long hours of tinkering in their workshops resulted in improved technology. During the War of 1812, he developed a system for making rifles using interchangeable parts, identical components that can be assembled to make a final product. Before this, the parts of a rifle were not standardized enough that one could be replaced for another. Under Eli’s system, each part could be mass produced and then the parts could be put together to make a gun. This vastly increased the efficiency of making guns and other items. Interchangeable parts then became the basis for mass production methods in the new northern factories. Corporations for Raising Capital In 1811, New York passed a law that made it easier for a business to incorporate and raise capital (money) by selling shares of stock. Other states soon followed New York’s lead. Owners of a corporation risked only the amount of money that they invested in a venture. They were not personally responsible for losses incurred by the corporation. Changes in state corporation laws facilitated the raising of the large sums of capital necessary for building factories, canals, and railroads. Factory System When Samuel Slater emigrated from Britain, taking information about factory designs out of the country was illegal. However, he had memorized the system and technology used in British cotton mills, and he applied these secrets to help establish the first U.S. textile factory in 1791. Early in the next century, the embargo and the War of 1812 stimulated domestic manufacturing and the protective tariffs enacted by Congress helped the new factories prosper. In the 1820s, New England emerged as the country’s leading manufacturing center as a result of the region’s abundant waterpower for driving the new machinery and excellent seaports for shipping goods. Also, the decline of New England’s maritime industry made capital available for manufacturing, while the decline of farming in the region yielded a ready labor supply. Other northern states with similar resources and problems—New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania—followed New England’s lead. As the factory system expanded, it encouraged the growth of financial businesses such as banking and insurance. Labor At first, factory owners had difficulty finding workers for their mills. Factory life could not compete with the lure of cheap land in the West. In response to this difficulty, textile mills in Lowell, Massachusetts, recruited young farm women and housed them in company dormitories. In the 1830s, other factories imitated the Lowell System. Many factories also made extensive use of child labor. Children as young as seven left home to work in the new factories. Toward the middle of the century, northern manufacturers began to employ immigrants in large numbers. 196 UNITED STATES HISTORY: AP ® EDITION  Unions Trade (or craft) unions were organized in major cities as early as the 1790s and increased in number as the factory system took hold. Many skilled workers (shoemakers and weavers, for example) had to seek employment in factories because their own small shops (the crafts system) produced items that could no longer compete with lower-priced, mass-produced goods. Long hours, low pay, and poor working conditions led to widespread discontent among factory workers. A prime goal of the early unions was to reduce the workday to ten hours. The obstacles to union success, however, were many: (1) immigrant replacement workers, (2) state laws outlawing unions, and (3) frequent economic depressions with high unemployment. Commercial Agriculture In the early 1800s, farming became more of a commercial enterprise and less of a means of providing subsistence for the family. Several factors promoted this switch to cash crops: Large areas of western land were made available at low prices by the federal government. State banks made acquiring land easier by providing farmers with loans at low interest rates. Initially, western farmers were limited to sending their products down the Ohio and Mississippi rivers to southern markets. The development of canals and railroads opened new markets in the growing factory cities in the East. Cotton and the South Throughout the 19th century, the principal cash crop in the South was cotton. Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin in 1793 (see Topic 3.12) transformed the agriculture of an entire region. Now that they could easily separate the cotton fiber from the seeds, southern planters found cotton more profitable than tobacco and indigo, the leading crops of the colonial period. They invested their capital in the purchase of enslaved African Americans and new land in Alabama and Mississippi (see Topic 4.13). The cotton industry connected the South with a global economy. Mills in New England and Europe depended on cotton grown by enslaved workers in the South. Shipping firms, banks, and insurance companies based in the North, particularly New York City, prospered through t