DOCSLIB.ORG

REAGIN, TIMOTHY MITCHELL, Ph.D. North Carolina, Claude Kitchin, and the Great War, 1869-1923

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
REAGIN, TIMOTHY MITCHELL, Ph.D. North Carolina, Claude Kitchin, and the Great War, 1869-1923 REAGIN, TIMOTHY MITCHELL, Ph.D. North Carolina, Claude Kitchin, and The Great War, 1869-1923. (2020) Directed by Dr. Charles C. Bolton. 253 pp. This dissertation investigates the state of North Carolina in the years before American intervention in the Great War by focusing on the actions, speeches, and writings of House Majority Leader Claude Kitchin. Despite his importance to such a pivotal decade in American history, Kitchin is a largely forgotten figure today. He worked to prevent the United States from entering the war but ultimately failed in this task. Other prominent figures are usually given credit as the loudest and most influential voices of opposition, but Kitchin excelled in this role. From his not so humble origins, he emerged as a leader of an anti-war preparedness movement at a time when so many Americans were pushing the country closer to the war. Kitchin worked around the clock to convince his own constituents, as well as Americans from around the country, that the United States was already well-prepared to face the challenges of a world at war. President Wilson called for a national campaign of war preparedness years before the United States was even at war. And because the Atlantic Ocean proved to be such a good barrier between the Old and New Worlds many of Kitchin’s contemporaries argued for tremendous increases in naval expenditures. Kitchin took particular issue with these demands for a dramatic naval build up and consistently reminded the nation that the United States already had the best navy in the world, behind Great Britain’s. “We are already prepared,” he often said. When it became clear that Kitchin was on the losing side of the fight, he stuck to his convictions and delivered an inspiring speech on the House floor hours before the vote for war. He knew this vote might signal the death knell of his political career but could only vote how his conscience allowed. After the declaration, he worked to protect the American people from overpaying for the war. He determined that if big businesses would profit from it, then they should pay for it. And he followed this policy until the war ended. After peace was declared and the Republicans took back Congress, he quietly faded out of the public view but never stopped working. NORTH CAROLINA, CLAUDE KITCHIN, AND THE GREAT WAR, 1869-1923 by Timothy Mitchell Reagin A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Greensboro 2020 Approved by _____________________________ Committee Chair © 2020 Timothy Mitchell Reagin To Owen ii APPROVAL PAGE This dissertation written by Timothy Mitchell Reagin has been approved by the following committee of the Faculty of The Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Committee Chair _________________________ Charles C. Bolton Committee Members _________________________ W. Greg O’Brien _________________________ Peter B. Villella _________________________ Dean J. Kotlowski _____________________________ Date of Acceptance by Committee _____________________________ Date of Final Oral Examination iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The University of North Carolina at Greensboro has been my home for many years now. My graduate committee at UNCG has been invaluable to my development as a young scholar and teacher. Dr. Charles Bolton took me under his wing when I arrived and has offered more support than I could ever ask for. His patience, guidance, and mentorship has been superb, and I could never have hoped for a better mentor in this discipline. He stood by me as I found a topic and enthusiastically supported me in every decision I made. His editorial skills and red pen were vital to improve my writing. I will forever be in Dr. Bolton’s debt. Dr. Greg O’Brien always challenged me to be a better historian and I am thankful to him for that. Dr. Peter Villella’s enthusiasm for my research has been a tremendous help these last few years and I am thankful to him for his support. No dissertation happens in isolation and I am indebted to the colleagues and friends I made along the way on my graduate journey. I will doubtless miss someone, please forgive me. I was lucky to have a wonderful extended cohort of Spartans in the history department and I thank them all. Joseph Ross was the first person to reach out to me and extend friendship when I came to UNCG. Brian Suttell, Matt Hintz, Chris Davis, Eric Oakley, Travis Byrd, Peter D’Arpa, Lynda Kellem, Stephen Comer, Brittany Hedrick, Mike Reuben, Kevin Chesley, Jacob Chilton, and Joshua Chilton have all been supportive, encouraging, and have become friends. I need to wish a special thanks to Anderson Rouse, Arlen Hanson, Kelsey Walker, and Ethan Moore in my small writing iv group, the THUMBs. Their feedback, support, and our collective writing and idea sessions were tremendously helpful. The graduate faculty and administration in the history department at UNCG have all helped me along this journey through direct support and general enthusiasm. I am especially grateful to Laurie O’Neill, Dawn Avolio, and Kristina Wright for their constant support. I am also thankful to Jodi Bilinkoff, Rick Barton, Mark Elliott, Lisa Tolbert, Jill Bender, Colleen Kriger, Jamie Anderson, Jeff Jones, Stephen Ruzicka, and Mark Moser who all served as mentors to me. Elsewhere at UNCG, I am thankful to Greg Bell and Lake’ Laosebikan-Buggs for professional mentorship. I would never have succeeded in this discipline without the solid educational foundation I received at Salisbury University (formerly Salisbury State University) as an undergraduate and in the Master of Arts program. The faculty in the history department installed in me a great love and respect for history. Dr. Dean Kotlowski guided me through the start of my graduate career in history at Salisbury. He sacrificed many late evenings after seminar classes to teach me how to be a historian and has since served as an advisor to this dissertation. I am eternally grateful to Dr. Kotlowski for his continued mentorship. I am also thankful to the entire history department at Salisbury and a great many of my fellow Seagulls. Special thanks to Jay Carlander, Creston Long, Tom Goyens, Joel Jenne, Wayne Ackerson, Tim Miller, Amanda Tuttle-Smith, Catlin Fisher, Rachel Wells, Tim Harlow, Paul Cyryca, Charles Overholt, Pilar Ugarte Burton, Travis Carr, and Zachary Gunderson for their early support of my career. And thanks to my v supporters from other institutions: Tyler Carr, Michael Hugunin, Andy Myers, Adam Tavel, Jim Vathis, and Louis Taylor. My family has been a constant source of support for my entire academic career. My wife Savanna, who has lived with “the dissertation” for as long as I have, I can never thank enough. I sacrificed a lot to get to this point which I regret to say included time I could have spent with her. Her unwavering support of my goals can never be repaid. She challenged me daily to be a better historian and person, even as she tackled her own graduate degree and career goals. She will always have my love. I regret that my mom, Kellee, did not live to see this project finished but I know she would be ecstatic to see me finish this dissertation. I am grateful to my dad, Tim, for being my first inspiration for a lifelong love of history by buying me historical fiction to read early in life. And, of course, to our family pets: Apollo, Artemis, and Gino who all sat with me through long nights and numerous pages. Finally, thanks to my brother and colleague, Shawn Reagin. It was through our long conversations about history that I came to this topic. He helped me develop the dissertation and has read every page more times than I have, even as he writes his own. He offered suggestions, ideas, and edits daily. We spent countless hours on the telephone going over my work. The only thing he did not do was write it himself. Thank you for the inspiration. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION: HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE GREAT WAR ................1 II. THE KITCHIN DYNASTY: BACKGROUND, BIOGRAPHY, AND POLITICS IN NORTH CAROLINA, 1869-1914 ..........................................34 III. CONFRONTING A WORLD AT WAR: CLAUDE KITCHIN, NORTH CAROLINA, AND AMERICA, 1914-1915 ..................................................75 IV. NORTH CAROLINA, THE SECOND-BEST NAVY, AND THE TEST OF PREPAREDNESS, 1916 ........................................................................125 V. NORTH CAROLINA FUNDS THE WAR, 1917-1918....................................161 VI. NORTH CAROLINA FIGHTS THE WAR, 1917-1918 ...................................189 VII. CONCLUSION: KITCHIN AND POSTWAR NORTH CAROLINA, 1919-1923 .....................................................................................................223 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................233 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Claude Kitchin Road Marker .............................................................................37 Figure 2. Claude Kitchin Official Portrait .........................................................................62 Figure 3. Lend Your Money to Your Government ..........................................................167 Figure 4. Be Patriotic .......................................................................................................179
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of the House Majority Leader
    = -*=41*=4+=9-*= 4:8*=&/47.9>=*&)*7a= 3=;*7;.*<= &19*7= _= 1*8?*0= *3.47=5*(.&1.89=.3=2*7.(&3=&9.43&1=4;*732*39= &3:&7>=3`=,**3= 43,7*88.43&1= *8*&7(-=*7;.(*= 18/1**= <<<_(78_,4;= -*00/= =*5479=+47=43,7*88 Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress About TheCapitol.Net We help you understand Washington and Congress.™ For more than 40 years, TheCapitol.Net and its predecessor, Congressional Quarterly Executive Conferences, have been training professionals from government, military, business, and NGOs on the dynamics and operations of the legislative and executive branches and how to work with them. Our training and publications include congressional operations, legislative and budget process, communication and advocacy, media and public relations, research, testifying before Congress, legislative drafting, critical thinking and writing, and more. TheCapitol.Net encompasses a dynamic team of more than 150 faculty members and authors, all of whom are independent subject matter experts and veterans in their fields. Faculty and authors include senior government executives, former members of Congress, Hill and agency staff, editors and journalists, lobbyists, lawyers, nonprofit executives, and scholars. We have worked with hundreds of clients across the country to develop and produce a wide variety of custom, on-site training programs. All courses, seminars, and workshops can be tailored to align with your organization’s educational objectives and presented on-site at your location. TheCapitol.Net is on the GSA Schedule, 874-4, for custom on-site training: GSA Contract GS02F0192X. TheCapitol.Net has more than 2,500 clients representing congressional offices, federal and state agencies, military branches, corporations, associations, news media, and NGOs nationwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Majority and Minority Leaders”, Available At
    Majority and Minority Party Membership Other Resources Adapted from: “Majority and Minority Leaders”, www.senate.gov Available at: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Majority_Minority_Leaders.htm Majority and Minority Leaders Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Majority and Minority Leaders Chapter 3: Majority and Minority Whips (Assistant Floor Leaders) Chapter 4: Complete List of Majority and Minority Leaders Chapter 5: Longest-Serving Party Leaders Introduction The positions of party floor leader are not included in the Constitution but developed gradually in the 20th century. The first floor leaders were formally designated in 1920 (Democrats) and 1925 (Republicans). The Senate Republican and Democratic floor leaders are elected by the members of their party in the Senate at the beginning of each Congress. Depending on which party is in power, one serves as majority leader and the other as minority leader. The leaders serve as spokespersons for their parties' positions on issues. The majority leader schedules the daily legislative program and fashions the unanimous consent agreements that govern the time for debate. The majority leader has the right to be called upon first if several senators are seeking recognition by the presiding officer, which enables him to offer motions or amendments before any other senator. Majority and Minority Leaders Elected at the beginning of each Congress by members of their respective party conferences to represent them on the Senate floor, the majority and minority leaders serve as spokesmen for their parties' positions on the issues. The majority leader has also come to speak for the Senate as an institution. Working with the committee chairs and ranking members, the majority leader schedules business on the floor by calling bills from the calendar and keeps members of his party advised about the daily legislative program.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Riverside Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Riverside UC Riverside Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Marginalized-Literature-Market-Life: Black Writers, a Literature of Appeal, and the Rise of Street Lit Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2d45f381 Author Norris, Keenan Franklin Publication Date 2013 Supplemental Material https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2d45f381#supplemental Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Marginalized-Literature-Market-Life: Black Writers, a Literature of Appeal, and the Rise of Street Lit A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English by Keenan Franklin Norris June 2013 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Erica Edwards, Chairperson Dr. Tiffany Lopez Dr. Toby Miller Copyright by Keenan Franklin Norris 2013 The Dissertation of Keenan Franklin Norris is approved: _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements This dissertation is the product of both my Ph.D. study at UC Riverside and my M.F.A. at Mills College. Therefore, I’d like to acknowledge people at both institutions that have helped me to conceptualize, craft and finalize this work. I’ve been very lucky to have Dr. Erica Edwards as my committee chair. I will forever be thankful to her for her generosity and all the work she’s done on my behalf. Likewise, the guidance of committee members Drs. Tiffany Lopez and Toby Miller has been a tremendous help in this process. I’m appreciative of the entire committee for allowing me the latitude to pursue this unique topic in a somewhat unconventional style— wedding scholarship with creative writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Literary, Subsidiary, and Foreign Rights Agents
    Literary, Subsidiary, and Foreign Rights Agents A Mini-Guide by John Kremer Copyright © 2011 by John Kremer All rights reserved. Open Horizons P. O. Box 2887 Taos NM 87571 575-751-3398 Fax: 575-751-3100 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.bookmarket.com Introduction Below are the names and contact information for more than 1,450+ literary agents who sell rights for books. For additional lists, see the end of this report. The agents highlighted with a bigger indent are known to work with self-publishers or publishers in helping them to sell subsidiary, film, foreign, and reprint rights for books. All 325+ foreign literary agents (highlighted in bold green) listed here are known to work with one or more independent publishers or authors in selling foreign rights. Some of the major literary agencies are highlighted in bold red. To locate the 260 agents that deal with first-time novelists, look for the agents highlighted with bigger type. You can also locate them by searching for: “first novel” by using the search function in your web browser or word processing program. Unknown author Jennifer Weiner was turned down by 23 agents before finding one who thought a novel about a plus-size heroine would sell. Her book, Good in Bed, became a bestseller. The lesson? Don't take 23 agents word for it. Find the 24th that believes in you and your book. When querying agents, be selective. Don't send to everyone. Send to those that really look like they might be interested in what you have to offer.
    [Show full text]
  • Speakers of the House: Elections, 1913-2021
    Speakers of the House: Elections, 1913-2021 Updated January 25, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL30857 Speakers of the House: Elections, 1913-2021 Summary Each new House elects a Speaker by roll call vote when it first convenes. Customarily, the conference of each major party nominates a candidate whose name is placed in nomination. A Member normally votes for the candidate of his or her own party conference but may vote for any individual, whether nominated or not. To be elected, a candidate must receive an absolute majority of all the votes cast for individuals. This number may be less than a majority (now 218) of the full membership of the House because of vacancies, absentees, or Members answering “present.” This report provides data on elections of the Speaker in each Congress since 1913, when the House first reached its present size of 435 Members. During that period (63rd through 117th Congresses), a Speaker was elected six times with the votes of less than a majority of the full membership. If a Speaker dies or resigns during a Congress, the House immediately elects a new one. Five such elections occurred since 1913. In the earlier two cases, the House elected the new Speaker by resolution; in the more recent three, the body used the same procedure as at the outset of a Congress. If no candidate receives the requisite majority, the roll call is repeated until a Speaker is elected. Since 1913, this procedure has been necessary only in 1923, when nine ballots were required before a Speaker was elected.
    [Show full text]
  • CRS Report for Congress Received Through the CRS Web
    Order Code RL30665 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web The Role of the House Majority Leader: An Overview Updated April 4, 2006 Walter J. Oleszek Senior Specialist in the Legislative Process Government and Finance Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress The Role of the House Majority Leader: An Overview Summary The majority leader in the contemporary House is second-in-command behind the Speaker of the majority party. Typically, the majority leader functions as the Speaker’s chief lieutenant or “field commander” for day-to-day management of the floor. Although the majority leader’s duties are not especially well-defined, they have evolved to the point where it is possible to spotlight two fundamental and often interlocking responsibilities that orient the majority leader’s work: institutional and party. From an institutional perspective, the majority leader has a number of duties. Scheduling floor business is a prime responsibility of the majority leader. Although scheduling the House’s business is a collective activity of the majority party, the majority leader has a large say in shaping the chamber’s overall agenda and in determining when, whether, how, or in what order legislation is taken up. In addition, the majority leader is active in constructing winning coalitions for the party’s legislative priorities; acting as a public spokesman — defending and explaining the party’s program and agenda; serving as an emissary to the White House, especially when the President is of the same party; and facilitating the orderly conduct of the House’s business. From a party perspective, three key activities undergird the majority leader’s principal goal of trying to ensure that the party remains in control of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Download History of the House Page Program
    HISTORY OF THE HOUSE PAGE PROGRAM CONTENTS Introduction 1 Page Origins 2 Page Responsibilities 7 Representatives as Role Models and Mentors 10 Page Traditions 12 Breaking Down Racial and Gender Barriers 17 Pages and Publicity 19 Schools, Dorms, and Reforms 21 Pages and the Communications Revolution 26 The End of the House Page Program 28 Notes 30 Pages wore lapel pins to identify themselves during work or to affiliate themselves with the Page program. Left, a National Fraternity of Pages pin owned by Glenn Rupp, a House Page in the 1930s, includes the date 1912, which may indicate the founding date of the organization. Middle, a Page pin from 1930 is more elaborately designed than the average uniform lapel pin and features an enamel shield with links attaching a pendant that indicates the date of service. Right, a pin from 100th Congress (1987– 1989) has a House seal in the center and is similar to those worn by Members on their own lapels. Page Pins, Collection of the U.S. House of Representatives i House Pages pose for a class photo on the East Front of the Capitol. Class Photo from The Congressional Eagle Yearbook, 2007, Collection of the U.S. House of Representatives For more than two centuries, young people served as Pages in the U.S. House of Representatives and enjoyed an unparalleled opportunity to observe and participate in the legislative process in “the People’s House.” Despite the frequent and colossal changes to America’s national fabric over that period, the expectations and experiences of House Pages, regardless of when they served, have been linked by certain commonalities—witnessing history, interacting with Representatives, and taking away lifelong inspiration to participate in civic life.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Calendar No. 607
    1 Union Calendar No. 607 110TH CONGRESS " ! REPORT 2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 110–934 REPORT ON THE LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS DURING THE 110TH CONGRESS JANUARY 2, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 79–006 WASHINGTON : 2009 VerDate Nov 24 2008 22:51 Jan 06, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\HR934.XXX HR934 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with HEARING E:\Seals\Congress.#13 COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York, Chairman FORTNEY PETE STARK, California JIM MCCRERY, Louisiana SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan WALLY HERGER, California JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington DAVE CAMP, Michigan JOHN LEWIS, Georgia JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts SAM JOHNSON, Texas MICHAEL R. MCNULTY, New York PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee JERRY WELLER, Illinois XAVIER BECERRA, California KENNY C. HULSHOF, Missouri LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas RON LEWIS, Kentucky EARL POMEROY, North Dakota KEVIN BRADY, Texas STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, Ohio THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York MIKE THOMPSON, California PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut ERIC CANTOR, Virginia RAHM EMANUEL, Illinois JOHN LINDER, Georgia EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon DEVIN NUNES, California RON KIND, Wisconsin PAT TIBERI, Ohio BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey JON PORTER, Nevada SHELLY BERKLEY, Nevada JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland KENDRICK MEEK, Florida ALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama (II) VerDate Nov 24 2008 13:20 Jan 06, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR934.XXX HR934 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with HEARING LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Plantation Progressive on the Federal Bench: Law, Politics, and the Life of Judge Henry D
    Alabama Law Scholarly Commons Working Papers Faculty Scholarship 3-10-2008 Plantation Progressive on the Federal Bench: Law, Politics, and the Life of Judge Henry D. Clayton Paul Pruitt University of Alabama - School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers Recommended Citation Paul Pruitt, Plantation Progressive on the Federal Bench: Law, Politics, and the Life of Judge Henry D. Clayton, (2008). Available at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers/624 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA SCHOOL OF LAW Plantation Progressive on the Federal Bench: Law, Politics, and the Life of Judge Henry D. Clayton Paul M. Pruitt, Jr. Revised from Southern Studies, Volume XIV (Fall-Winter 2007), 85-139 This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1104005 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1104005 1 Plantation Progressive on the Federal Bench: Law, Politics, and the Life of Judge Henry D. Clayton* Note: This is a lightly revised version of an article previously published in Southern Studies, XIV (Fall-Winter 2007), 85-139. I. Preface From the fall of 1901 to the spring of 1914, Thomas Goode Jones was judge of Alabama’s Middle and Northern districts.1 A former governor, Jones had been a well- known figure in Alabama before receiving judicial appointment from President Theodore Roosevelt.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodrow Wilson, Congress, and the Income Tax by Don
    Woodrow Wilson, Congress, and the Income Tax By Don Wolfensberger An Introductory Essay for the Congress Project Seminar on “Congress and Tax Policy” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Tuesday, March 16, 2004 At almost every session Congress has made some effort, more or less determined, towards changing the revenue system in some essential portion; and that system has never escaped radical alteration for ten years together. Had revenue been graduated by the comparatively steady standard of the expenditures, it must have been kept stable and calculable; but depending as it has done on a much debated and constantly fluctuating industrial policy, it has been regulated in accordance with a scheme which has passed through as many phases as there have been vicissitudes and vagaries in the fortunes of commerce and the tactics of parties. – Woodrow Wilson Congressional Government (1885) Introduction The modern American tax system was conceived during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921). The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, empowering Congress “to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived....” was ratified on February 23, 1913, just nine days prior to Wilson’s inauguration as president. One of Wilson’s first acts as president was to call Congress into special session on April 7 for the purpose of legislating lower tariffs and thereby fulfilling one of the campaign pledges of the Democratic Party platform and of Wilson the candidate. The next day, April 8, Wilson traveled to Capitol Hill to deliver his tariff message in person before a joint session of Congress–the first president to do so since John Adams.1 Part of Wilson’s “New Freedom” platform was to dismantle monopolies, and one of the ways of doing so was to take away high protective tariffs which he saw as one of the economic foundations of monopolies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law Treaty Negotiation: a Presidential Monopoly?
    The Law Treaty Negotiation: A Presidential Monopoly? LOUIS FISHER Library of Congress In “The Law” section of the March 2007 issue, I analyzed misconceptions by Justice George Sutherland in his decision in United States v. Curtiss-Wright (1936), where he described the president as “sole organ” in foreign affairs. This article examines his erroneous statements about the president’s authority to negotiate treaties. Sutherland stated that the president makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate “but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress itself is powerless to invade it.” That statement was false when written, false when Sutherland served earlier as a U.S. senator from Utah, and false in contemporary times, especially in light of fast-track procedures that bring both chambers of Congress closer to the negotiation process for trade agreements. United States v. Curtiss-Wright (1936) involved a dispute over legislation passed by Congress two years earlier authorizing the president to impose an arms embargo in a region in South America. The issue was whether Congress had delegated too much of its legislative power to the president. In 1935, the Supreme Court had struck down two delegations of power to the president involving domestic policy.1 The question presented in Curtiss-Wright was a narrow one: could Congress delegate greater discretion to the president in foreign affairs? Writing for a 7-1 Court, Justice George Sutherland decided that it could. Justice James C. McReynolds dissented, stating his opinion that the district court reached the right conclusion by striking down the delegation as excessive.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 the Creation of the US Tariff Commission
    Chapter 3 The Creation of the U.S. Tariff Commission Photo: Frank Taussig, the first Commission Chairman. Page | 71 Chapter 3: The Creation of the U.S. Tariff Commission W. Elliot Brownlee155 Introduction The great movement for economic and political reform that swept the nation in the early 20th century—the movement that historians commonly refer to as “progressivism”—provided the impetus for the creation of the U.S. Tariff Commission. At the national level, the progressive movement had as one of its major targets the tariff system that had emerged from the American Civil War. The high-water mark of progressive reform of tariffs was the enactment in 1913 of the Underwood-Simmons Tariff Act as a central expression of the “New Freedom” agenda that President Woodrow Wilson had championed in his successful bid for the presidency in 1912. (The sponsors of the act were Oscar W. Underwood, a Democratic Representative from Alabama, and Furnifold M. Simmons, a Democratic Senator from North Carolina.) In framing this agenda Wilson called for sweeping reforms that would constrain corporate power and expand economic opportunities for middle-class Americans. The result was an unprecedented burst of federal legislation. It began with the Underwood-Simmons Tariff (referred to below as the Underwood Tariff) and was followed in short order by the Federal Reserve Act (1913), the Federal Trade Commission Act (1914), and the Clayton Antitrust Act (1914). In the process of enacting these measures Wilson displayed more effective executive leadership than had any another President since Abraham Lincoln. And, the measures themselves permanently expanded the role of the federal government in the economy and, at the same time, enhanced the power of the executive branch.
    [Show full text]