|
|
◄
PREVIOUS
Monroe’s Era of Good Feelings: 1816–1824
|
NEXT
► Jackson and the Whigs: 1830–1844
|
The Pre-Civil War Era (1815–1850)
Adams
and Jackson: 1824–1833
Events
1824
Presidential election of 1824 (Adams
vs. Jackson) is disputed
1825
House of Representatives chooses Adams for the presidency
1828
Congress passes “Tariff of Abominations”
Jackson is elected president
1829
John C. Calhoun publishes “South Carolina Exposition
and Protest”
1832
Jackson thwarts attempt to re-charter Bank of the
United States
Congress passes Tariff of 1832
Jackson is reelected
South Carolina Nullification Crisis
1833
Congress passes Compromise Tariff of 1833
Congress passes Force Bill
Key People
John Quincy Adams -
Sixth U.S. president; won disputed election against
Andrew Jackson
John C. Calhoun -
Vice president to both Adams and Jackson; major voice
of the South in national politics
Henry Clay - Kentuckian
statesman; major voice of the West in national politics; orchestrated
Compromise Tariff of 1833
Daniel Webster - Massachusetts
senator; major voice of the Northeast in national politics
The Election of 1824
The Era of Good Feelings was definitely over by the time
the 1824 election
rolled around. Controversy over the Missouri Compromise and Monroe
Doctrine, combined with the depression that followed the Panic of 1819,
undermined national unity. Five candidates—all of them Democratic-Republican—ran
for the presidency that year.
Initially, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams was
the strongest candidate. Also popular was Speaker of the House Henry
Clay. Then, in the summer of 1824,
General Andrew Jackson threw himself into the race.
Although he had little political experience, he became the dominant
candidate because he was the most popular man in the country. In
the end, Jackson received more popular votes than the others, but
no candidate won enough electoral votes to become president.
The “Corrupt Bargain”
As was the case in 1800,
the House of Representatives had to elect the next president. Because
of Clay’s last-minute support, the House chose Adams. But when Adams
then named Clay his secretary of state, Americans were outraged.
Most of the American presidents up to this point had served previously
as secretaries of state, and the position was commonly regarded
to be the stepping-stone to the presidency. Jacksonites thus clamored
that Adams had won only because of a “corrupt bargain” with
Clay. His reputation ruined, Adams remained politically impotent
throughout his four years.
Growing Sectionalism
The election of 1824 was
different from previous elections in that support for candidates
was highly sectional. In the late 1700s,
Federalists and Democratic-Republicans alike drew support from the North
as well as the South. Then, during the Era of Good Feelings, most
Americans identified with the Democratic-Republicans. In 1824,
however, this unity had disappeared: Adams carried New England solidly,
while Jackson relied on the South and West. The results of the 1828 election
were similarly divided by region.
Regionalism vs. Federalism
Akin to the growing sectionalism in the United States
was the emerging power struggle between regionalism and federalism.
President Jackson was the embodiment of federal power. Though a
Democrat, he firmly believed that the federal government should
have the final say over the states. He also demonstrated on numerous occasions
that he felt the presidency to be the strongest of the three branches
of government.
On the other hand, sectional politicians were emerging
as well. Henry Clay from Kentucky became the voice
of the West, lobbying to improve western infrastructure to facilitate
transportation and help the growing agricultural economy. Clay’s
ally Daniel Webster, from Massachusetts, was the primary
advocate for the North, campaigning for infrastructure as well as
higher protective tariffs to help Northern manufacturers. The primary
voice of the South was the states’ righter John C. Calhoun.
The Election of 1828 and “Old Hickory”
Jackson ran again in 1828 for
the Democratic-Republicans (by this time known simply as the Democrats).
Adams ran against Jackson as a National Republican but lost after
carrying only New England. Jackson, who had appeal with the common
men of America, took all of the West and South.
In reality, Jackson—or “Old Hickory,” as many called him—was a
wealthy slave owner, lawyer, and general who had almost nothing in
common with the average westerner. Still, his reputation as a fighting
frontiersman and his military prowess proved more popular than the
stuffy Adams from New England.
The Spoils System
Upon taking office, Jackson immediately surrounded himself
with like-minded cronies, distributing the spoils of victory to
greedy office-seekers who had supported him throughout his legal,
military, and political careers. Jackson defended this spoils
system with arguments that Washington needed a change of
pace, but opponents slammed him for filling the administration with
democratic rabble and abusing his powers of office. Indeed, many
of these spoils-seekers did turn out to be corrupt and untrustworthy.
The Tariff of Abominations
Jackson’s first political battle came soon after his election
and involved the always-sticky issue of tariffs. Jackson’s supporters,
bitter after his 1824 loss
to Adams, had pushed for the passage of an incredibly steep tariff.
The Jacksonites believed that southern congressmen would kill the
tariff before it became law, which would anger pro-tariff New Englanders,
who would blame Adams and vote him out of office.
Unfortunately for the Democrats, the tariff was actually
passed in 1828,
after Jackson had already defeated Adams. Southerners, who imported
many foreign goods and had no manufacturing of their own, cried
out against the Tariff of 1828,
which they labeled the “Tariff of Abominations,” claiming
that it made Yankees rich at their expense. Jackson’s vice president, John
C. Calhoun of South Carolina, led the protests against the
tariff by writing an anonymous essay called “South Carolina Exposition
and Protest” in 1829. Inspired
by the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798–1799, Calhoun’s
pamphlet argued that the individual states in the South should declare
the tariff null and void.
The Nullification Crisis
For the next four years, South Carolinians tried to muster
enough votes within the state legislature to act on Calhoun’s proposal.
Even though Jackson himself disliked the tariff, he stood firmly
against nullification and disobedience of the federal government.
Congress did pass another lower tariff, the Tariff of 1832,
as a gesture of goodwill to the South, but southerners still objected.
Eventually, the South Carolinians succeeded, and legislators
met at a special convention in 1832 to
nullify the Tariff of Abominations within the state. Jackson, enraged
at the action, dispatched the navy to the South Carolina coast and
prepared an army task force of Unionist troops.
The Compromise Tariff of 1833
Fortunately, no shots were ever fired, for the ever-diplomatic Henry Clay proposed
a compromise. He suggested that Congress draft a new tariff that
would lower the duties over time to the percentage stipulated by
the Tariff of 1816.
Northern manufacturers protested the loss of their protection, but
South Carolinians jumped at the opportunity to resolve the situation
without bloodshed. As a result, Congress passed the Compromise
Tariff of 1833.
To prevent any future nullification showdowns, Congress
simultaneously passed the Force Bill, which authorized
the president to use military force to collect tariff duties. Clay
thus ended a crisis that could have thrown the North and South into
a civil war thirty years earlier than it actually occurred.
Worsening Sectionalism
The Nullification Crisis marked a turning point in North-South relations.
More than anything else, southerners saw the Tariff of Abominations
as a northern attack on their way of life. Since the political duel
over Missouri, southerners had grown increasingly suspicious of
what they perceived to be northern designs to stifle them. Indeed,
northerners in general were growing increasingly
critical of the South’s dependence on slavery. The Nullification
Crisis proved to be a boiling point: whereas the regions, though
different, had coexisted peacefully in the past, they grew increasingly
more hostile toward each other after 1832.
This trend would continue until the outbreak of the Civil War.
  Help |
Feedback |
Make a request |
Report an error |
Send to a friend
◄
PREVIOUS
Monroe’s Era of Good Feelings: 1816–1824
|
NEXT
► Jackson and the Whigs: 1830–1844
|
|
|