Conspectus of the History of Political Parties and the Federal Government/Conspectus of Political History/Madison
Madison’s Administration.
Madison’s policy, both in regard to foreign and general affairs was the same as that of Jefferson. His inaugural address contained an enunciation of principles which repeated, in substance, those of his predecessor, and added nothing save what was demanded by the exigencies of the times.
Diplomacy.—Mr. Madison inherited from the previous administration the pending controversy with England. He desired to avert war as long as possible by the use of diplomacy. England and France were still at a dead-lock and disregarding neighboring neutrals. The former adhered to her “orders in council,” and insisted that “a man once a subject was always a subject;” the latter had authorized the seizure and confiscation of American vessels which should enter the ports of France. Mr. Erskine, the British minister, in April, 1809, concluded a treaty with the government, which engaged that the “orders in council” should be withdrawn; but the British ministry refused to sanction his action. When the Non-intercourse act expired, in May, 1810, Mr. Madison “caused proposals to be made to both belligerents, that if either would revoke its hostile edict, this law should only be revived and enforced against the other nation.” France accepted the proposal and received the benefits of its execution; England did not.
Attempt to recharter the National Bank.—As the National Bank would cease to exist on the 4th of March 1811, unsuccessful attempts that year were made in Congress to pass a bill rechartering the institution. The measure was advocated by the Federalists; the Republicans as a rule opposed the bill, although some of them gave it their support.
Third embargo.—In April, 1812, the President recommended an embargo for sixty days; Congress passed a bill to that effect, but extended the time to ninety days.
Election of 1812.—The Republican party was divided on the question of a war with England. One portion favoring the war, and headed by Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun, was called the war party; the other portion questioned the propriety of a declaration of war, and received the sympathy of the President. The war party determined that Mr. Madison should identify himself with them, and refused to give him their support for a second term unless he would comply with their wishes. The desired effect having been produced upon the President, he was nominated for re-election by the Republicans, at a congressional caucus held at Washington on the 8th of May. The Federalists, having no ticket of their own, supported Clinton and Ingersoll. In the south and west, Mr. Madison met with but little opposition; in New England the contest was exciting; and in New York, where the Clintonians and Federalists coalesced, there were “accusations of infidelity to the Republican cause, which inflicted political wounds that were never healed.”
Clintonians.—Certain Republicans in northern and southern states, not wishing that Virginia should monopolize the administration of the country, objecting to the caucus system because by it the people were not consulted in selecting candidates, and dissatisfied with the foreign policy of the administration—withdrew their support from Mr. Madison, and, headed by the New York legislature, nominated DeWitt Clinton and Jared Ingersoll for the offices of President and Vice-President. The supporters of this ticket were called Clintonians. They issued an address to the electors of the United States, which constituted the platform of their party, and contained a statement of the issues involved in the campaign. [See D. and Pl.]
War declared and supported.—The war of 1812 was declared and supported by the Republicans, and for the measure they were held responsible. On the first of June the President, in a message, declared that our flag was continually violated on the high seas; that the right of searching American vessels for British seamen was claimed and practiced; that thousands of American citizens had been dragged on board of foreign ships and exiled to distant climes; that remonstrances were disregarded; that a peaceful adjustment was refused; that American blood had been shed; and that the British ministry had been intriguing for a dismemberment of the Union. Deliberations in favor of war were begun immediately, carried on with closed doors, and hurried through so rapidly that the minority were cut off from debate. On the 18th of June war was declared, but it was a party rather than a national war. It was supported in the south and the west with unanimity and patriotism; in New England it was violently opposed. Perhaps nine-tenths of the people were at first in favor of war. The administration party branded the leaders of the minority as Jacobins, enemies of republics, and as monarchists, designing the subversion of the Union. In December, 1813, the President recommended greater restrictions on importations. Congress, accordingly, in secret session, passed a bill imposing great “restrictions on commerce on inland waters.” This is known as the embargo.
Negotiations for a peace which would insure to the United States a redress of the wrongs complained of, were in progress during most of the war. In 1813, the Emperor of Russia offered his mediation between the hostile governments. It was accepted by the United States and declined by England; but the latter proposed to treat directly with our government. This met with the approbation of the administration, and a treaty of peace was signed at Ghent, in Belgium, December 24th, 1814.
Federal opposition.—After the declaration of war thirty-four Federal representatives protested, in an address, both against the war and the way in which it had been declared. Not all of the minority opposed the war; but some of them declared it presumptuous, inexpedient, unnecessary, immoral, cruel, unjust, and ruinous. Some of the New England states refused the militia aid which the administration called for. Massachusetts voted two memorials to Congress, protesting against the war and praying for peace. In February, 1814, a committee of the general assembly of this state presented the following report on numerous petitions which had been sent to the legislature: “A power to regulate commerce is abused, when employed to destroy it; and a manifest and voluntary abuse of power sanctions the spirit of resistance, as much as a direct and palpable usurpation. The sovereignty reserved to the states was reserved to protect the citizens from acts of violence by the United States, as well as for the purpose of domestic regulation. We spurn the idea that the free, sovereign and independent state of Massachusetts is reduced to a mere municipal corporation, without power to protect its people and defend them from oppression, from whatever quarter it comes. When the national compact is violated, and the citizens of the state are oppressed by cruel and unauthorized law, this legislature is bound to interpose its power and wrest from the oppressor his victim.” This report embodied the political ideas contained in the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798, and shows that the Federals were advocating, in regard to state sovereignty, the doctrine which they condemned in Adams’ administration. The Republicans declared the report to be treasonable. The political parties on this subject had completely changed grounds.
The Peace party was formed, professedly, for the purpose of inculcating the benign doctrines of peace, but its ulterior purpose was to oppose the war and “array the religious sentiment of the country against the administration.” “The Washington Benevolent Society” was established, having similar objects in view.
The blue light telegraph was used at New London to inform the ships of the enemy when American vessels would put to sea. It consisted of blue lights which were thrown up and burned like rockets.
The Hartford convention assembled nine days before the treaty of Ghent. It consisted of Federal delegates from the New England states. They deliberated three weeks with closed doors, and prepared an address in which they expressed themselves in regard to the condition of the country and the policy of the administration. They adopted a number of resolutions, which, among other things, called for seven amendments to the constitution. [See D. and Pl.] It was imputed, at the time, that the convention had for its ultimate object a movement which would enable the New England states to negotiate a separate peace with Great Britain, but the change in our foreign relations prevented a disclosure of its ulterior purposes.
Death of the Federal party.—When the war was over, the country was soon blessed with great prosperity. The sufferings of the conflict were forgotten, and men seemed to remember, most of all, how reluctantly the Federals had aided the Union in its time of need. Their leaders had taken part in the Hartford convention, and its designs, by the opposition, were declared to be treasonable. The guilt attached to a connection with this convention isolated the leaders more and more, while their followers rapidly joined the opposing ranks. At this time the dissolution of the Federal party began; it continued till the organization ceased to exist.
National Bank.—In April, 1816, a bill providing for the establishment of a National Bank was passed by Congress. The institution was chartered for a term of twenty years. The measure being eminently Republican, met with Federal opposition. On the question of a bank the parties had changed places since 1811.
Protective tariff.—In his seventh annual message, Mr. Madison urged upon Congress a revision of the tariff, and gave reasons why home industry should be protected. Congress, pursuant to the recommendation, enacted a protective tariff. Protection had hitherto been secondary, now it was of primary importance. The law was as popular in the south as in any other section of the Union, in view of the heavy duties upon raw cotton, which Great Britain imposed at that time. The bill was opposed by the Federals. The Republicans, to strengthen their position in support of the act, republished Hamilton’s report. Since the days of Hamilton the parties had exchanged positions on the tariff question. The measure at this time was defended by Clay, Calhoun and Lowndes. Webster and Randolph were arrayed against it.
The election of 1816.—At a Republican caucus, March 16th, 1816, two unsuccessful attempts were made “to pass a resolution declaring it inexpedient to make caucus nominations by members of Congress.” The practice had previously occasioned a defection among the Republicans, and now nineteen of the congressmen refused to participate in the proceedings. Monroe and Tompkins were nominated, by a vote which was declared unanimous. The Federals, coalescing with Clintonians, who repudiated caucus nominations, were without much strength; their candidates were Rufus King and John E. Howard.
Though the nomination of Monroe had been resisted on personal grounds, and because of “an unwillingness on the part of many that the ‘Virginia Dynasty’ should continue,” he, nevertheless, was elected by 183 votes against 34 cast for the Federalists.
Internal improvements were at first favored by Mr. Madison, but during his administration his mind underwent a change on the subject, and on the day before his retirement from office he vetoed a bill favoring such works. He did not think that the constitution authorized the government to them.