Collection of Hack-Phreak Scene Programs/cleanhpvac.zip/cleanhpvac/HOMEWORK.ZIP/HISFEDIS.TXT

Text File | 1998-07-25 | 20KB | 586 lines

        The Federalist Party was one of the original two political parties

   existing at the beginning of the United State's history.  As did the

   opposing Democratic-Republican party, it's birth was within the

   congressional and executive branches of the govenment during the first

   administration of George Washington.  It thrived as the most dominant

   political power in the government until it's downfall in the election of

   1800.  Finally, until 1816, it repeatedly challenged the office of the

   President proving unsuccessful each time.  However, it did remain a

   force in some states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Delaware into the

   mid-1820's.  As the party dwindled, it's members seeped into the Whig Party

   and the Democratic Party headed by Andrew Jackson.

        The Federalist Party also had its own share of influential men

   advocating its policies.  Notable are Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, John

   Jay, George Cabot, Rufus King, John Marshall, Timothy Pickering, and

   Charles Cotesworth Pinckney.  They, in 1787, pushed for a more effective

   Constitution. The group arose from debating new issues under new circum-

   stances.  It was not from, a line of pro-Constitutionalist group evolving

   in the 1780's.

        Alexander Hamilton, the undisputed champion of the Federalist Party,

   appealed directly to business interests such as holders of government

   securities, financiers, manufacturers, shipowners, and speculators in

   Western lands.  He attracted support from those we advocated a strong and

   stable, centralized government as opposed to dispersing power to states.

   Hamilton supported the Tories who had stayed in America and were now

   citizens.  He in effect, represented all the "wealth and talents" of the
                                            1
   Conservative classes in the United States.









        Until the party's defeat in 1800, it had an aristocratic style that

   frowned upon democracy.  The party's main thrust was situated in the North-

   east, where the failings of the Confederation government before 1788 had

   occassional economic distress, commercial stagnation, and a fear of civil
           2
   disorder.  Although the party had some influence in Virgina, North

   Carolina, and parts of Charlestown, SC, the South's major appeal was given

   to Thomas Jefferson.  The small farmers who owned and worked their land

   shifted toward the Republican Party.  Freehold farmers, Jefferson felt, were
                                                            3
   the best and truest support for the Republican government.

        Washington's views and actions clearly put him in the Federalists

   camp.  Throughout, his presidencey, he preferred to appoint men who

   supported the Constitution and a strong federal government with authority.

   Although Washington was determined to represent all the people, he

   surrounded himself with those who supported the new form of government.

   He also fought to make the federal government effective.  Thus, those
                                                                 4
   elected to Congress as "Federalists" gave him the most support.

        A well-defined Federalist party was nonexistent before 1794.  After

   Washington's inauguration in 1789, many debates began in Congress and the

   Cabinet over the ideas that the Secretary of the Treasury Hamilton proposed.

   He felt that the national government should assume all state debts, fund

   the national debt at par value, and charter a national bank.

        A national bank was crucial for Hamilton and Federalist economic

   plans.  Modeled after the Bank of England, it put "wealth into the hands of

   men who were best qualified to use it for constructive national purposes,"

   according to Hamilton.  Such a bank would increase the capital for

   businesses, support the value of government bonds, provide a source of









   public loans, speed up the collection and disbursement of money, and

   quicken circulation of currency.

        Hamilton theorized that a bank could be founded with the investment

   of the federal government as well as private individuals.  He wanted the

   government to supervise the bank while the private share holders manage it.

   The government would pay one-fifth of the ten millon dollar bill while

   other investors could purchase bonds up to three-fourths the value of the

   stocks.  Such notes were acceptable as payment for all debts to the United
                                                     5
   States and thus became a form of national currency.

        Now the Agrarian critics were alarmed.  Its granted monopoly did not

   seem justified.  Its very existence as a government supported institution,

   was doubted.  One congressman went as far as saying that he "would no more be
                                                  6
   seen entering a bank than a house of ill fame."

        The question of its constitutionality brought forth another political

   issue that seperated the parties.  Hamiltonians believed in the "loose"

   interpretation of the Constitution.  They felt that the authority to

   charter such an institution was implied and therefore saw nothing wrong in

   creating it.

        Jeffersonians felt a lax interpretation was not intended by our fore-

   fathers.  Thus, anything not specifically written in the Constitution was

   illegal.  Even Madison, in his most nationalistic phase, doubted Congresses

   ultimate power to create such a charter.  He insisted that there were no

   words written in the Articles of Confederation permitting the establishment

   of such a charter.

        Finally, the Federalists succeeded in their milestone attempt at

   centralization.  The House of Representatives enacted the Bank of the








                                                    7
   United States by a vote of thirty-seven to twenty.

        In 1794, the two parties drew distinct lines of seperation.

   The creation of Jay's Treaty caused much friction between the Federalist

   party led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republican party of Madison

   and Jefferson.

        To prevent an arising war, President Washington sent Chief Justice

   John Jay to London to discuss a possible truce.  The Republicans did not

   like the choice of representative because of Jay's reputation for being a

   die-hard Federalist.  They questioned his allegiance to the United States.

        In the treaty, it seemed as though the United States had surren-

   dered. Jay had received few rewards for his country during the negotia-

   tions.  The British had received the bargaining strategies from doubtful

   Hamilton and thus overwhelmed John Jay.  The talks proved futile for the

   United States but also spelled disaster for the Republican South.  Britain

   agreed to pay damages for the recent seizures of American Ships.  In

   return, the debts owed to British merchants on pre-Revolutionary accounts

   were still held binding.  As money was rolling in to Federalist shippers

   collecting damages, more was leaving the south as the Jeffersonian

   planters paid off their debts.  This economic tradegy split the two

   parties, both sectionally and politically.  There was now a very fine line

   between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans.

        From then on, the Federalists enjoyed commercial and diplomatic harmony

   with Britain, domestic stability and order, and a strong national government

   under powerful exective and judicial branches.

        George Washington, by the end of his second term was closely

   identified as a Federalist.  His actions and words reflected that.









        Many analyses can be obtained on the Farewell Address written by

   Washington during the remaining days of his administration.  Many argue

   that Washington "was doing two quite contradictory things.  In repeating

   traditional dogmas against party and faction, he was striking at the

   Republican opposition, thus in effect making a partisan statement himself,

   and this reflected "his intellectual confusion" (as Richard Hofstadter

   has put it) "about the problem of government and opposition." He was '

   allying himself with a party... not knowing that he had done so,' having
                                                              8
   just issued a `campaign document' against the other party."

        Washington declares, "it is the duty of every individual to obey the

   established government."  Therefore "all combinations and associations,

   under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct,

   controul, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the

   constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principles...

        They serve to organize faction; to give it an artificial and

   extraordinary force; to put in the place of the delegated will of the

   nation of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of

   the community, and according to the alternate triumphs of different

   parties, to make the public administration the mirror of ill-concerted and

   incongruous projects of fraction rather than the organ of consistent and

   wholesome plans, digested by common counsels and modified by mutual
              9
   interests."

        From this quote, Washington was speaking of specific men who were

   doing these things.  He wanted to warn his fellow citizens.

        Thus, in his Farewell Address to the United States, he was not only

   bidding his people adieu, he was telling them that he had, to all intents








                                                                    10
   and purposes, became a Federalist without openly acknowledging it.

        Unable to persuade Washington to lead them again for a third term,

   the Federalists went to Vice-President John Adams who had a conservative

   outlook.  The Federalists, however, disapproved of his independence in

   politics and disagreements with Hamilton, who, while not occupying

   and official position within the government, continued to have much

   influence over the members of the president's cabinet.

        Adams continued with Washington's cabinet officers and maintained

   the financials and commercial policies designed by Hamilton.  With Britain,

   he remained neutral.  However, with France, a more complicated issue took

   place.

        To ease the strain with France over the recent signing of Jay's Treaty,

   Adams sent envoys to reach a settlement.  The Americans had a chilly

   reception when demanded for a bribe.  Adams reported the three French
                                                     12
   Agents as X,Y, and Z to Congress and to the public.  A popular cry was

   "Millions for defence, but not one cent for tribute!"  An undeclared war

   began.  Adams received Federalist support while Republicans criticized

   his actions.

        As the quasi-war died away, the Federalists took the popularity that

   they were receiving to hamper the position of their opposition.  In 1798,

   they ran through Congress, the notorious Alien and Sedition Acts.

        The Alien Act, though never exercised, gave the President power for

   two years to expel any alien whom he might deem "dangerous to the peace and

   safety of the United States."  This seemed like a violation of liberty to
                                                                   13
   most Americans, especially to the unnaturalized Irish and French.

        Only the Sedition Law compared to the unconstitutionality of the Alien









   Act.  It placed heavy penalties on anyone found guilty of trying to stir up

   "Sedition"  or who wrote anything "false, scandelous, or malicious" against

   either house of Congress, the President, or the government.

        Adams began to have more and more disagreements within his party and

   from the Hamilton faction, especially with military matters.  By demand, he

   sealed negotiations with France in 1799 and reorganized the cabinet to be
                                                               14
   under his control, thus making a break from the Hamiltonians.  This step

   probably helped the Federalist position.  It was not enough, however, to

   defeat Jefferson in the presidential election of 1800.  Jefferson's

   policies were not at all outlandish to most moderate Federalists.

   Therefore, he hoped to win them over and gain their support.

        The Federalist Party was now breaking up.  During the last declining

   days of his presidency, Adams managed to make peace with France, and appoint

   moderate Federalist John Marshall as Chief Justice.  Marshall preserved the

   Federalist principles on the bench long after their death.

        The Federalists had finally found themselves in the opposition.  At

   last, they made a well organized system of state party organizations and

   adopted democratic ways to attract voters.  Primarily concentrated in the

   Northeast, they began to consider themselves a sectional minority.  Unable

   to maintain their original political concepts, they diverged from their

   previous advocacy to strong central government.  They opposed the Louisiana

   Purchase as being too costly and destructive of Northern influence.  As time

   wore on, they continued to lose power nationally and were left carrying

   only Connecticut, Delaware, and part of Maryland against Jefferson in 1804.

        With that defeat and Hamilton's death during the same year, the Fed-

   eralist Party might not have survived. It was revived, however, from the









   blunder made by Jefferson's wrongful Embargo of 1807.  This use of

   executive prerogative was as high handed as any Federalist act.  As a

   result, the Federalists carried all of New England, Delaware, and parts of

   North Carolina and Maryland in the 1808 election against Madison.  Luckily,

   their hopes were kept alive with the declaration of war in 1812.  That

   brought New York, New Jersey, and more of Maryland under their wing.

        However, their interjection of the war effort almost instantly

   destroyed the party's popularity.

        In late 1814, when the capture of New Orleans seemed imminent, Mas-

   sachusetts called for a Convention at Hartford.  Three states sent full

   delegations while two other sent partial representation.  A group of

   twenty-six Federalists, discussed, for three weeks, their grievances

   and to seek redress for their wrongs.

        When all of their problems were discussed, they sent three special

   envoys to the capital. When they arrived, they were overwhelmed by the

   news from New Orleans, followed by that from Ghent.  With much embarrass-

   ment, they hung their heads in shame and crawled away leaving an
                                               15
   impresssion that they had committed treason.

        During the election of 1816, the party carried only Connecticut, Mass-

   achusetts, and Delaware.  They lost to Monroe.  The Federalist Party

   lingered on in these states but never regained power.  By 1828, it had

   completely disappeared.

        The party's contribution to the development of this country is evident.

   Its principles bestowed a form and basis to mature on during its later

   endeavors. Its leaders had laid the basis of a national economy, created

   a national judicial system, and created universal principles of foreign









   policy. But its failure to accommodate to the changing times and the

   desire of its people left it a dinosaur wondering through a modern city.

   Many Americans could not accept its economic aggressiveness.  It was the

   simple folk who plowed and tilled their land that wanted to govern them-

   selves.  Democracy had finally shined through.  However, as Federalists

   would have wished, ignoring immediate advantage, they gained the esteem of

   posterity.



                                Bibliography




        Beard, Charles A. and Beard, Mary R. and Beard, William, The Beards'
                New Basic History of the United States, New York: Doubleday
                and Company, Inc., 1960, p.163-167


        Bowers, Claude G., Jefferson and Hamilton The Struggle for Democracy
                In America, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1953, p.140,
                375-378


        Elkins, Stanley and McKitrick, Eric., The Age of Federalism, New York:
                Oxford University Press. 1993, p.490, 493-496, 694-696


        Ellis, Joseph J., Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy of John
                Adams, New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 1993, p.27-29


        Hofstadter, Richard, The American Political Tradition and the Men Who
                Made It, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965, p.29-38, 41


        Miller, John C., The Federalist Era, New York: Harper & Row, 1965,
                p.55-69


        Nordham, George W., The Age of Washington, Chicago: Adams Press, 1989,
                p.237


        Sources of the American Republic, vol. I, ed. by M. Meyers, A. Kern,
                J. G. Cawelti, Glenview, Illinois: Scot Foresman, 1960





                                  Footnotes


        1.  Charles A. Beard and Mary R. Beard and William Beard, The Beards'
                New Basic History of the United States, (New York: 1960),
                pp. 164

        2.  Ibid.

        3.  Ibid.

        4.  George W. Nordham, The Age of Washington, (Chicago: 1989), pp. 237

        5.  John C. Miller, The Federalist Era, (New York: 1965), pp.55-57

            Sources of the American Republic, vol. I, ed. by M. Meyers, A. Kern,
                J. G. Cawelti, (Glenview, Illinois: 1960), pp. 197

        6.  Ibid.

        7.  Nordham, op. cit., pp.57

        8.  Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick, The Age of Federalism, (New
                York: 1993), pp.493-494

        9.  Ibid., pp. 494

       10.  Ibid., pp. 490

       11.  Joseph J. Ellis, Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy of John
                Adams, (New York: 1993), pp. 27-28

       12.  Beard, op. cit., pp.164

       13.  Ibid., pp.165-167
            Elkins, op. cit., pp. 694-696
            Claude G. Bowers, Jefferson and Hamilton The Struggle for
                Democracy In America, (Boston: 1953), pp. 376-377

       14.  Richard Hofstadter, The American Political Tradition & the Men Who
                Made It, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf), 1965, pp.32

       15.  Beard, op. cit., pp. 170