DOCSLIB.ORG

Historical Dilemmas: Andrew Jackson and the Debate Over Indian Removal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historical Dilemmas: Andrew Jackson and the Debate Over Indian Removal Historical Dilemmas: Andrew Jackson and the Debate Over Indian Removal Historical Think Aloud Presenters: James Howell, Auburn University John Saye, Auburn University National Council for the Social Studies Annual Conference – Seattle, Washington November 16, 2012 Full Unit available to PIH Network members. Lesson 3: Andrew Jackson Thinks Aloud (2 days) Unit Central Question: Should Andrew Jackson be honored as a great president? Lesson Focus Question: Should Andrew Jackson support the removal of Indians to western reservations? Purposes: 1. Provide historical context for Andrew Jackson’s decision to support the removal of Indians from the Southeast. 2. Encourage perspective-taking of historical points-of-view on the question of Indian Removal. 3. Encourage dialectical reasoning about the question of Indian Removal. 4. Encourage use of historical evidence and persuasive reasoning to construct and defend an argument about a historical issue. 5. Encourage collaborative dialogue and team-building skills among students. Executive Summary of Entire Lesson: Students engage in a jigsaw group activity in order to understand the debate over the removal of Indians from the southeast United States as well as Andrew Jackson’s ultimate decision to support removal. Students are put in the position of Andrew Jackson, President of the United States, and are asked to decide whether Andrew Jackson should support or oppose the removal of Indians. Students first work with the whole class to “Think-Aloud” as Andrew Jackson by reading and discussing an internal dialogue that expresses Jackson’s dilemma. Students then work in expert groups where they examine and become an expert on the opinions of one historical actor: Lewis Cass, Elias Boudinot, John Ross, or Catherine Beecher. Students then work in decision-making groups where they hear from the four historical actors and then decide the course of action they believe Andrew Jackson should have taken. At the conclusion of the lesson, student groups present their decision to the class in the form of a statement explaining their decision. The class compares recommendations and discusses the merits of each option as well as their own personal views of the best decision. Materials: • Introductory Power Point (Previous Day) • Indian Removal Timeline handout (Previous Day) • Andrew Jackson Thinks Aloud handout • Expert Group Advisor Letters: o Lewis Cass o Elias Boudinot o Chief John Ross o Catherine Beecher • Expert Group “Markers” – paper strips with group names & colors • Andrew Jackson Decision Making handout • Class Discussion Guide (teacher only) • Indian Removal Individual Writing Assessment © PIH Network, 2011. All Rights Reserved. • Jackson Indian Removal Video & Final PowerPoint Slide Lesson Procedures: Background Lecture – Conclusion of Previous Lesson: The teacher walks students through a very brief power point that provides geographic and historical background on the failure of the “Civilization Program” and on the continued expansion of whites onto Indian lands. Two save time, we recommend that this lecture be given at the conclusion of the previous lesson. However, we recognize that teachers may choose to pair it with today’s lesson. The lecture includes a few key dates during Westward Expansion, a timeline of which students will receive in handout form. The teacher concludes the lecture by presenting the problem scenario but avoids telling the students which course of action Andrew Jackson should choose. Main Lesson Body: Andrew Jackson Thinks Aloud: The teacher leads the class through a reading of the “Andrew Jackson Thinks Aloud” interior monologue. The teacher should be careful to answer student questions and to ensure that the entire class has a firm grasp on Andrew Jackson’s dilemma. The teacher may choose to use the guided questions at the conclusion of the reading to help students comprehend and interpret Jackson’s thoughts. Expert Groups: Students are assigned to one of four expert groups. Each group is responsible for becoming an expert on the views of one person that might have advised Andrew Jackson on whether or not to remove the Indians: Lewis Cass, a proponent of removal, Elias Boudinot, a proponent of removal, Chief John Ross, an opponent of removal, and Catherine Beecher, an opponent of removal. Each expert group analyzes a letter addressed to Jackson from an assigned historical figure. Although not actual historical documents, each letter is based upon source materials in order to authentically represent the advice that each individual might have given to Jackson on the eve of removal in 1830. The group completes a guided question scaffold at the end of the letter to help them better understand their figure’s position. At the end of expert group work, each group discusses the major points they will make as they take their figure’s arguments to the decision-making groups. Expert Group Advisor Letters: Lewis Cass Letter Elias Boudinot Letter Chief John Ross Letter Catherine Beecher Letter Decision-making Groups: Students move into new groups made up of a member from each of the expert groups. Each expert will present arguments for or against Indian Removal while the remaining students attempt to understand and record each expert’s opinion. The groups use the Andrew Jackson Decision-Making Group Analysis Scaffold to record the advice from each expert. When each of the experts has presented their position the group moves out of their advisor roles and all collectively act as Andrew Jackson. The group debates the merits of each advisor’s position and decides on a course © PIH Network, 2011. All Rights Reserved. of action they believe Jackson should take. Once they have made a decision, they write it in a box on the decision making scaffold and prepare to share it with the class. Socratic Discussion: Using the Whole Class Discussion Guide, the teacher leads the class to deliberate about whether Indian Removal was the right decision in a Socratic discussion format. During this discussion students share their own personal thinking and not the views of the “expert” they represented previously. Students should be invited to participate in the discussion based on their personal beliefs about the course of action Andrew Jackson should have taken in 1830. Individual Assessment: Students complete an Individual Assessment at their seats in which they summarize the problem, lists pros and cons of Indian Removal, and then express their own individual thinking about whether Andrew Jackson should have removed the Indians. Conclusion: Students watch a film clip that presents Andrew Jackson’s historical decision and the reasons why he chose to support the removal of Indians (Video is in PowerPoint). Teacher uses final PowerPoint slide to discuss the effects of removal. Students compare these historical events to their own evaluations of Indian Removal and discuss what they think will happen to Indians as a result of removal. © PIH Network, 2011. All Rights Reserved. President Andrew Jackson Thinks Aloud The United States has a problem. The people of the United States and the Indians are starting to get in each other’s way. Since George Washington was president, we have tried to civilize the Indians and teach them to live like white people but it doesn’t seem to be working. We want them to become good Christians, but the Indians prefer to follow their own beliefs and to hunt and farm as they please. The Indians live on lands that could be used by white citizens of the United States. It is hard to stop fighting between the whites and the Indians when they both want the same land. The Indians use the land mostly to hunt and don’t really build cities or big farms. Whites want to use this land for farming and cotton production. This would put many people to work and help them earn money. But bad fighting has broken out between the white settlers and Indians. The Indians could move out West where they will not be bothered by the white settlers but it would be hard for them to leave the lands their tribes have been on for hundreds of years. The Indians could be safer out in the West, but their way of life might also be lost forever. It would be hard for them to start over, but it would also be hard for them to stay in the East where whites are moving onto their lands. The Indians do not believe they are a part of the United States. Indians make their own laws and rules and do not follow the same laws as Americans. Indians currently live right next to white Americans. It is becoming harder to keep these people separate. If the Indians do not want to mix with Americans and do not want to share their lands, they may have to move west just to survive. I need to come up with a solution to this problem because I am the people’s leader and they want me to make a decision that will solve this problem. Should we let Indians stay on the lands they have always lived on, or should we remove them to new lands so that white settlers can have their lands? Is Indian Removal the best solution for the problems between whites and Indians? I must decide. Guiding Questions: 1. What is Andrew Jackson’s problem? 2. Why would the Indians want to stay on their lands? 3. Why would the white settlers want the Indians to move out west? 4. Why is this a hard decision for Andrew Jackson? © PIH Network, 2011. All Rights Reserved. [This letter is fictional but authentically represents the ideas of the historical character.] Background: You are Catherine Beecher, a prominent educator and writer. You have published a letter in the Christian Advocate and Journal calling on American women to stand up against the Indian Removal Act even though women have few political rights.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Martin Van Buren: the Greatest American President
    SUBSCRIBE NOW AND RECEIVE CRISIS AND LEVIATHAN* FREE! “The Independent Review does not accept “The Independent Review is pronouncements of government officials nor the excellent.” conventional wisdom at face value.” —GARY BECKER, Noble Laureate —JOHN R. MACARTHUR, Publisher, Harper’s in Economic Sciences Subscribe to The Independent Review and receive a free book of your choice* such as the 25th Anniversary Edition of Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, by Founding Editor Robert Higgs. This quarterly journal, guided by co-editors Christopher J. Coyne, and Michael C. Munger, and Robert M. Whaples offers leading-edge insights on today’s most critical issues in economics, healthcare, education, law, history, political science, philosophy, and sociology. Thought-provoking and educational, The Independent Review is blazing the way toward informed debate! Student? Educator? Journalist? Business or civic leader? Engaged citizen? This journal is for YOU! *Order today for more FREE book options Perfect for students or anyone on the go! The Independent Review is available on mobile devices or tablets: iOS devices, Amazon Kindle Fire, or Android through Magzter. INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE, 100 SWAN WAY, OAKLAND, CA 94621 • 800-927-8733 • [email protected] PROMO CODE IRA1703 Martin Van Buren The Greatest American President —————— ✦ —————— JEFFREY ROGERS HUMMEL resident Martin Van Buren does not usually receive high marks from histori- ans. Born of humble Dutch ancestry in December 1782 in the small, upstate PNew York village of Kinderhook, Van Buren gained admittance to the bar in 1803 without benefit of higher education. Building on a successful country legal practice, he became one of the Empire State’s most influential and prominent politi- cians while the state was surging ahead as the country’s wealthiest and most populous.
    [Show full text]
  • James Knox Polk Collection, 1815-1949
    State of Tennessee Department of State Tennessee State Library and Archives 403 Seventh Avenue North Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0312 POLK, JAMES KNOX (1795-1849) COLLECTION 1815-1949 Processed by: Harriet Chapell Owsley Archival Technical Services Accession Numbers: 12, 146, 527, 664, 966, 1112, 1113, 1140 Date Completed: April 21, 1964 Location: I-B-1, 6, 7 Microfilm Accession Number: 754 MICROFILMED INTRODUCTION This collection of James Knox Polk (1795-1849) papers, member of Tennessee Senate, 1821-1823; member of Tennessee House of Representatives, 1823-1825; member of Congress, 1825-1839; Governor of Tennessee, 1839-1841; President of United States, 1844-1849, were obtained for the Manuscripts Section by Mr. and Mrs. John Trotwood Moore. Two items were given by Mr. Gilbert Govan, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and nine letters were transferred from the Governor’s Papers. The materials in this collection measure .42 cubic feet and consist of approximately 125 items. There are no restrictions on the materials. Single photocopies of unpublished writings in the James Knox Polk Papers may be made for purposes of scholarly research. SCOPE AND CONTENT The James Knox Polk Collection, composed of approximately 125 items and two volumes for the years 1832-1848, consist of correspondence, newspaper clippings, sketches, letter book indexes and a few miscellaneous items. Correspondence includes letters by James K. Polk to Dr. Isaac Thomas, March 14, 1832, to General William Moore, September 24, 1841, and typescripts of ten letters to Major John P. Heiss, 1844; letters by Sarah Polk, 1832 and 1891; Joanna Rucker, 1845- 1847; H. Biles to James K. Polk, 1833; William H.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth of Presidential Power
    Growth of Presidential Power A. Article II of the Constitution 1. Article II is the part of the Constitution that deals with the Executive Branch. 2. Article II is basically just a short outline of powers. 3. A large part of America’s early political history deals with defining the extent of the executive power. B. The Changing View of Presidential Power 1. Why Presidential Power Has Grown -The presidency is in the hands of one person, rather than many, and many Presidents have worked to expand the powers of their office. -As the country grew and industrialized, especially in times of emergency, people demanded that the Federal Government play a larger role and looked to the President for leadership. -Congress has delegated much authority to the President, although presidential control over foreign affairs is greater than it is over domestic affairs. Congress simply continues to assert itself in the implementation of social programs. -Presidents have the attention and general respect of the media, the public, and their own party. C. How Presidents Have Viewed Their Power 1. Stronger and more effective Presidents have taken a broad view of the powers of the office. 2. Teddy Roosevelt viewed his broad use of Presidential powers as the “Stewardship Theory”, which means that the President should have the power to act as a “steward” over the country. 3. Recent, very strong presidents have given rise to the phrase “Imperial Presidency”, which implies that the President becomes as strong as an emperor. The term is often used to refer to the administration of Richard Nixon.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Jackson: Should He Be on the $20 Bill?
    ANDREW JACKSON: SHOULD HE BE ON THE $20 BILL? Introduction: Historians continue to debate the merits of the decisions and actions taken by President Andrew Jackson during his two terms in office. Living between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, Jackson played a central role in virtually all of the controversial issues of his time - Indian removal, economic reform, states' rights, and slavery. Overshadowed in popular culture by the Founding Fathers and even wartime Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt, Jackson nonetheless played a pivotal role in America's development. In 1929, the Treasury Department replaced Grover Cleveland's portrait on the twenty-dollar bill with that of Jackson, a nice bit of irony considering Jackson's opposition to paper money. Today, some people advocate replacing Jackson's image with that of some other prominent American, such as Martin Luther King or even President Ronald Reagan Procedures/tasks: -You will be assigned a specific role you are to research. Do not forget it or you will loose points off your final grade for the project. Write it down on the line below: I am researching the role of _______________________________ - Once you have your role you are to go to http://www.pbs.org/kcet/andrewjackson/edu/webquest2task.html and read the instructions that start with the line, “For this WebQuest, it is the 1920s and the…” PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL NOT BE GIVING A SPEECH – YOU ARE TO WRITE A PERSUASIVE ESSAY INSTEAD - Once you have read the directions click on the name/group you were assigned to.
    [Show full text]
  • James Buchanan As Savior? Judicial Power, Political Fragmentation, and the Failed 1831 Repeal of Section 25
    MARK A. GRABER* James Buchanan as Savior? Judicial Power, Political Fragmentation, and the Failed 1831 Repeal of Section 25 A ntebellum Americans anticipated contemporary political science when they complained about the tendency of embattled political elites to take refuge in the judiciary. Recent scholarship on comparative judicial politics suggests that judicial review is a means by which constitutional framers provided protection for certain class interests that may no longer be fully protected in legislative settings. Tom Ginsburg claims, "[I]f they foresee themselves losing in postconstitutional elections," the politicians responsible for the constitution "may seek to entrench judicial review as a form of political insurance." 1 Such a constitutional design ensures "[e]ven if they lose the election, they will be able to have some access to a forum in which to challenge the legislature."2 In 1801, Thomas Jefferson foreshadowed this strategy. He asserted that the defeated Federalist Party had "retired into the judiciary as a stronghold ...and from that battery all the works of republicanism are to be beaten down and erased.",3 More than a half century later, Chief Justice David S. *Professor of Law and Government, University of Maryland School of Law. This Article was written while the author was the 2008-09 Wayne Morse Chair at the University of Oregon School of Law. I am grateful to the Morse Foundation, Margaret Hallock, and Elizabeth Weber for their remarkable support. I am also grateful to numerous colleagues at the University of Maryland School of Law and elsewhere who read and commented on what follows without giggling too much.
    [Show full text]
  • President Buchanan's Minister to China 1857-1858
    WILLIAM B. REED: PRESIDENT BUCHANAN'S MINISTER TO CHINA 1857-1858 BY FOSTER M. FARLEY* A PRESIDENT'S administration is usually evaluated by some A great occurrence, good or bad, and other aspects of his term of office are forgotten. Martin van Buren and Herbert Hoover are generally charged with beginning the depressions of 1837 and 1929; Ulysses S. Grant and Warren G. Harding are usually thought of in connection with the various scandals and corruption during their administrations; and James Madison and James Buchanan with beginning the War of 1812 and the American Civil War. james Buchanan, the fifteenth President of the United States 'remains one of the least known statesmen of the American Nation."' According to Buchanan's latest biographer, Philip S. Klein, "many people remember Buchanan as the bachelor in the Ahite House who either caused the Civil War or who ought, some- how to have prevented it."2 Few people realize that the fifteenth President was singularly well qualified to occupy the White House. Born in 1791, a native of Pennsylvania, Buchanan graduated from Dickinson College in 1809. and was admitted to the bar three years later. With a good knowledge of the law, he served first in the Pennsylvania house arid then for the next ten years as Congressman. After serving as United States Minister to Russia from 1831-1833, he was elevated to the United States Senate.3 By 1844 he had be- come a leading contender for the Democratic nomination for President, and when James K. Polk was elected, the new Presi- dent appointed Buchanan Secretary of State mainly due to the *The author is Associate Professor of History at Newberry College.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Jackson
    THE JACKSONIAN ERA DEMOCRATS AND WHIGS: THE SECOND PARTY SYSTEM THE “ERA OF GOOD FEELINGS” • James Monroe (1817-1825) was the last Founder to serve as President • Federalist party had been discredited after War of 1812 • Monroe unopposed for reelection in 1820 • Foreign policy triumphs: • Adams-Onís Treaty (1819) settled boundary with Mexico & added Florida • Monroe Doctrine warned Europeans against further colonization in Americas James Monroe, By Gilbert Stuart THE ELECTION OF 1824 & THE SPLIT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY • “Era of Good Feelings” collapsed under weight of sectional & economic differences • New generation of politicians • Election of 1824 saw Republican party split into factions • Andrew Jackson received plurality of popular & electoral vote • House of Representatives chose John Quincy Adams to be president • Henry Clay became Secretary of State – accused of “corrupt bargain” • John Quincy Adams’ Inaugural Address called in vain for return to unity THE NATIONAL REPUBLICANS (WHIGS) • The leaders: • Henry Clay • John Quincy Adams • Daniel Webster • The followers: • Middle class Henry Clay • Educated • Evangelical • Native-born • Market-oriented John Quincy Adams WHIG ISSUES • Conscience Whigs – abolition, temperance, women’s rights, etc. • Cotton Whigs – internal improvements & protective tariffs to foster economic growth (the “American System”) THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICANS (DEMOCRATS) • The leaders: • Martin Van Buren • Andrew Jackson • John C. Calhoun • The followers: Martin Van Buren • Northern working class & Southern planter aristocracy • Not well-educated • Confessional churches • Immigrants • Locally-oriented John C. Calhoun DEMOCRATIC ISSUES • Limited power for federal government & states’ rights • Opposition to “corrupt” alliance between government & business • Individual freedom from coercion “KING ANDREW” & THE “MONSTER BANK” • Marshall’s decision in McCulloch v.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Jackson Collection, 1788-1942
    State of Tennessee Department of State Tennessee State Library and Archives 403 Seventh Avenue North Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0312 ANDREW JACKSON COLLECTION, 1788-1942 Accession numbers: 3, 37, 38, 41, 297, 574, 582, 624, 640, 646, 691, 692, 845, 861, 968, 971, 995, 1103, 1125, 1126, 1128, 1170 1243, 1301, 1392, 69-160, and 78-048 Processed by Harriet C. Owsley and Linda J. Drake Date completed: June 1, 1959 Revised: 1964 Microfilm Accession Number: Mf. 809 Location: VI-A-4-6 The collected papers of and materials about Andrew Jackson (1767-1845), Judge Advocate of Davidson County, Tennessee, Militia Regiment, 1791; member of Congress, 1796-1798, 1823- 1824; Major General, United States Army, 1814; Governor of Florida Territory, 1821; and President of the United States, 1828-1836, were collected by Mr. And Mrs. John Trotwood Moore on behalf of the Tennessee State Library and Archives during their respective terms as State Librarian and Archivist. The documents were acquired from various sources. Linear feet of shelf space occupied: 6.0 Approximate number of items: 1.500 Single photocopies of unpublished writings may be made for purposes of scholarly research. Microfilm Container List Reel 1: Box 1 to Box 3, Folder 13 Reel 2: Box 3, Folder 13 to Box 6, Folder 2 Reel 3: Box 6, Folder 3 to Box 9 On Reel 3 of the microfilm, targets labeled box 5 should be labeled Box 6. SCOPE AND CONTENT NOTE The Andrew Jackson Papers, approximately 1,500 items (originals, photostats, and Xerox copies) dating from 1788 to 1942, are composed of correspondence: legal documents; clippings; documents about the Dickinson duel; articles about Andrew Jackson; biographical data concerning Andrew Jackson; biographical data concerning Ralph Earl (portrait painter); John H.
    [Show full text]
  • James Buchanan Denied the Truth of General Jack- Son's Public Charge
    The "Corrupt Bargain" Calumny 61 JACKSON, BUCHANAN, AND THE "COKRUPT BARGAIN" CALUMNY* By RICHARD R. STENBERG, Ph.D. James Buchanan denied the truth of General Jack- son's public charge in 1827 of "corrupt bargain" against Clay, a charge in which Buchanan (a young Eepresentative from Pennsylvania) was named as the "corrupt" Clay's agent. This adjourned question of veracity has never been fully solved. Some historians have believed Jackson and disbelieved Buchanan; but most of them think Buchanan's version nearer the truth, and deny a corrupt bargain. Those, however, who reject Jackson's assertions have gladly accepted the weak apology which Buchanan made for his friend's un- truths—that the Old Hero labored under an honest mis- apprehension. But Jackson's private papers and the circumstances seem to reveal that he had no honest misapprehension and that the "corrupt bargain" affair merely illustrates Jackson's subtle falseness and * Dr. Stenberg, after the completion of this contribution to the Mag- azine, spent considerable time at the Library of Congress in the exam- ination of original source material for an extensive treatment of Andrew Jackson. He has just announced the discovery of amazing evidence, too late for publication here, which refers to George Kremer's letter to Mr. Jackson of March 8, 1825, published in Bassett's Correspondence of Andrew Jackson (III. 281), and discussed in this article. Dr. Sten- berg writes that the "postscript" to the Kremer letter has every ap- pearance of being a forgery added by Jackson himself. His forthcoming book, The Insidious Andrew Jackson, will contain a photograph of the Kremer document, so that the "postscript" may be compared with the main body of the letter.
    [Show full text]
  • Inaugural History
    INAUGURAL HISTORY Here is some inaugural trivia, followed by a short description of each inauguration since George Washington. Ceremony o First outdoor ceremony: George Washington, 1789, balcony, Federal Hall, New York City. George Washington is the only U.S. President to have been inaugurated in two different cities, New York City in April 1789, and his second took place in Philadelphia in March 1793. o First president to take oath on January 20th: Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1937, his second inaugural. o Presidents who used two Bibles at their inauguration: Harry Truman, 1949, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953, George Bush, 1989. o Someone forgot the Bible for FDR's first inauguration in 1933. A policeman offered his. o 36 of the 53 U.S. Inaugurations were held on the East Portico of the Capitol. In 1981, Ronald Reagan was the first to hold an inauguration on the West Front. Platform o First platform constructed for an inauguration: Martin Van Buren, 1837 [note: James Monroe, 1817, was inaugurated in a temporary portico outside Congress Hall because the Capitol had been burned down by the British in the War of 1812]. o First canopied platform: Abraham Lincoln, 1861. Broadcasting o First ceremony to be reported by telegraph: James Polk, 1845. o First ceremony to be photographed: James Buchanan, 1857. o First motion picture of ceremony: William McKinley, 1897. o First electronically-amplified speech: Warren Harding, 1921. o First radio broadcast: Calvin Coolidge, 1925. o First recorded on talking newsreel: Herbert Hoover, 1929. o First television coverage: Harry Truman, 1949. [Only 172,000 households had television sets.] o First live Internet broadcast: Bill Clinton, 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • “Nebraska Territory”
    3 – POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY “Nebraska Territory” By: Stephen Douglas Date: January 30, 1854 Explanation of the Source: While debating Abraham Lincoln, Stephen Douglas explains the principles of Popular Sovereignty (Self-Government) in the Compromise of 1850. “Upon the other point--that pertaining to the question of slavery in the Territories--it was the intention of the committee to be equally explicit. We took the principles established by the Compromise of 1850 as our guide, and intended to make each and every provision of the bill accord with those principles. Those measures established and rest upon the great principle of self-government--that the people should be allowed to decide the questions of their domestic institutions for themselves, subject only to such limitations and restrictions as are imposed by the Constitution of the United States, instead of having them determined by an arbitrary or geographical line… The leading feature of the Compromise of 1850 was congressional non-intervention as to slavery in the Territories; that the people of the Territories, and of all the States, were to be allowed to do as they pleased upon the subject of slavery, subject only to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. That, sir, was the leading feature of the compromise measures of 1850. Those measures therefore, abandoned the idea of a geographical line as the boundary between free States and slave States; abandoned it because compelled to do it from an inability to maintain it; and in lieu of that substituted a great principle of self-government, which would allow the people to do as they thought proper.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Van Buren, Letter to Thomas Ritchie (1827)1
    AMERICAN POLITICAL THOUGHT Keith E. Whittington Supplementary Material Chapter 4: The Early National Period – Citizenship and Community Martin Van Buren, Letter to Thomas Ritchie (1827)1 Martin Van Buren, the “Little Magician,” grew up near Albany New York in a Dutch farming community in the years after the American Revolution. He had limited formal education but apprenticed to be an attorney. He was soon drawn into politics and became an advocate for Thomas Jefferson’s election to the presidency in 1800. He quickly emerged as an ambitious and cunning political strategist. He was instrumental in organizing a New York faction of the Republican Party (the “Bucktails”) who were hostile to the faction led by Governor De Witt Clinton. The Bucktails sent Van Buren to the U.S. Senate in 1821. He returned to New York to briefly serve as governor in 1829, before resigning to become U.S. Secretary of State under President Andrew Jackson. He succeeded Jackson in the presidency in the 1836 elections, serving one ill-fated term of office. Although he wanted to return to the White House, he was not able to regain the Democratic nomination after his electoral defeat in 1840. In his later years, he became an increasingly vocal antislavery Democrat, receiving the Free Soil Party presidential nomination in 1848. Van Buren was instrumental in forming the Democratic Party around the candidacy of Andrew Jackson in the late 1820s. The party division between the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists had been washed away during the “Era of Good Feelings” under President James Monroe. In 1824, the electorate had fractured among various regional “favorite son” candidates.
    [Show full text]