John Jay's Treaty Analysis

241 Words1 Page

Strong sectional implications arose from the terms of Jay’s Treaty. Tensions developed between the two political parties over Jay’s Treaty. Alexander Hamilton gave Jay advice on negotiating the treaty. “Hamilton recommended an approach that would both stabilize relations with Great Britain and guarantee increased trade between the United States and Great Britain” ( “John Jay’s Treaty, 1794-95”). The Republicans disagreed with the treaty and questioned the intentions of the Federalists in their negotiations. This strained the unity of the U.S. “The treaty also provoked a fierce debate in Congress over the role of the House of Representatives in foreign affairs” (Keene, et al. 175). The public also strongly disagreed with the treaty. “Riots

Show More
Related

  • Era Of Good Feelings Dbq Analysis

    799 Words  | 2 Pages

    The country, after winning the war of 1812, had a good deal of political nationalism, although sectionalist elements were beginning to emerge. The federalist party collapsed after the war and the Hartford convention, which diminished the party’s popularity. Therefore, as shown in Document I, the election of 1820 was very one sided, which lessened political divisions in the United States. This also showed that the American people were very united on the issues, which strengthened nationalism. By 1824 however, the strong nationalistic unity had collapsed, ushering John Quincy Adams, who would prove to be a very divisive president. One must also look at duality of the issue of the Missouri compromise. One one hand, as shown in Document F, the very idea of drawing a line across the country is wholly separatist. The tensions and divisions created with the Missouri compromise would grow, and lead to the establishment of two very different societies in the North and South. On the other hand, the line illustrated the willingness of the politicians to work together to improve the nation. This compromise was proof that though not all agreed on every issue, the goal of holding the country together was more important than north/south divisions. The “Era of Good Feelings” is an accurate name for this time period because although not all measures passed supported future unity, they demonstrated a temporary union and

    Read More

  • Strict/Loose Jacksonian Democracy

    1064 Words  | 3 Pages

    Based on the following doctrines, I believe the extent of characterization of the two parties was not completely accurate during the presidencies of Madison and Jefferson, because of key pieces of evidence that proves inconsistencies during the period between 1801 and 1817. In the following essay, I will provide information supporting my thesis, which describes the changing feelings by each party and the reasoning behind such changes.

    Read More

  • Jacksonian Democrats vs. The Whigs

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout the 1830-1840’s the opposing governmental parties, the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whigs, undertook many issues. The Whigs were a party born out of their hatred for President Andrew Jackson, and dubbed his harsh military ways as “executive usurpation,” and generally detested everything he did while he was in office. This party was one that attracted many other groups alienated by President Jackson, and was mainly popular among urban industrial aristocrats in the North. On the other hand, the Jacksonian Democrats were a party born out of President Andrew Jackson’s anti-federalistic ideals that was extremely popular among southern agrarians. A major economic issue that the two parties disagreed on was whether or not the United States should have a National Bank. Along with the National Bank, the two parties also disagreed on the issue of the Protective tariff that was enforced to grow Northern industry. Politically, the two parties disagreed on the issues of Manifest Destiny, or expansion, and ultimately Slavery. While the two parties essentially disagreed on most issues, there are also similarities within these issues that the two parties somewhat agree on.

    Read More

  • territorial expansion dbq

    669 Words  | 2 Pages

    In conclusion, in the eighteen hundreds, many people debated over whether territorial expansion was good or bad. Debates between the supporters and opposers created tension in the nation and enforced sectionalism. Although, typically, everybody is supposed to have the same say in government, it can be clearly seen during this time period that the supporters of territorial expansion had a greater influence on the policies created by the federal government.

    Read More

  • Thomas Jefferson: Pragmatics over Doctrine

    624 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the period 1800-1817, the Jeffersonians to a great extent compromised their political principles and essentially “out Federalized the Federalists”. While traditional Jeffersonian Republicanism advocated a strict interpretation of the Constitution and an emphasis on an agrarian economic system, the actual policies of Presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were markedly different from their theoretical principles. This obvious compromise of Jeffersonian principles is evident in the Federal government’s assumption of broad-based political powers and institution of capitalistic Hamiltonian economic reforms, both of which stemmed from Jefferson and Madison’s adoption of broad constructionist policies.

    Read More

  • The Antebellum United States and the Increase of Sectionalism

    1618 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...ong the various sections of the United States increased. The country, similarly to the democratic party, shattered along sectional lines due to the individual interests of the sections. The south, above all, was bonded in an effort to preserve and spread slavery through the usage of popular sovereignty. New England was bonded together with the conviction that slavery was immoral and that the spread of slavery should be hindered. The west was bonded together over a mutual appreciation of democratic principles such as popular sovereignty as well as an understanding that slavery was undesirable within their own states because it would add additional competition. As the nation turned upon itself there was no other alternative but war which would ultimately pit one section of the nation against the other in a battle of slavery, moral conviction, and personal liberties.

    Read More

  • War Of 1812 Dbq

    292 Words  | 1 Pages

    At the political level, the war had important consequences, as it involved the end of the Federalist Party, one of the two American national parties. The failures suffered in the first year of the war generated

    Read More

  • Drafting the Constitution

    2555 Words  | 6 Pages

    By the late eighteenth century, America found itself independent from England; which was a welcomed change, but also brought with it, its own set of challenges. The newly formed National Government was acting under the Articles of Confederation, which established a “firm league of friendship” between the states, but did not give adequate power to run the country. To ensure the young nation could continue independently, Congress called for a Federal Convention to convene in Philadelphia to address the deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation. While the Congress only authorized the convention to revise and amend the Articles the delegates quickly set out to develop a whole new Constitution for the country. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the new Constitution called for a national Executive, which was strongly debated by the delegates. There were forces on both sides of the issue trying to shape the office to meet their ideology. The Federalists, who sought a strong central government, favored a strong National Executive which they believed would ensure the country’s safety from both internal and external threats. The Anti Federalists preferred to have more power in the hands of the states, and therefore tried to weaken the national Executive. Throughout the convention and even after, during the ratification debates, there was a fear, by some, that the newly created office of the president would be too powerful and lean too much toward monarchy.

    Read More

  • The Early United States: A Two Sided Coin

    1274 Words  | 3 Pages

    The topic(s) that will be discussed in this paper include Laws and Federal Policies during early American history. The material discussed in this paper comes exclusively from Exploring American Histories by Nancy A. Hewitt and Steven F. Lawson. This paper will cover documents within the text that pertain to the topic. The aim of this paper is to argue that from even the earliest points in American history, there was an opposing and supporting standpoint to each law and federal policy. Since its start, the United States has been a two-sided coin of support and opposition. Issues such as Independence, Slavery, and Succession are three of the many that show the United States to be a country that does not always come to a consensus.

    Read More

  • Evolution of the American Political System

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    One of the, if not the most important event of our political history would be the creation of the Articles of Confederation. Written on November 15, 1777 and ratified on March 1, 1781, they were the first official constitution of the United States. Newly independent from the tyrant nation of Great Britain, the colonist didn’t want to establish a unitary government in fear that it would become too similar to the British system. Instead they wanted a confederation, where most of the power was in the hands of each individual state. Just after six years the Confederate system’s flaws became clear. Civil disorder,

    Read More

  • The Effects Of The War Of 1812

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    After the War of 1812 the people of the United States of America started to take a greater pride in their country and a nationalism rivaling that experienced during the American Revolution was felt throughout the states. After the War of 1812, the great hostilities of the Federalist and Democratic-Republican parties were broken as the Federalist Party was ruined and most of its members were absorbed into the Democratic-Republican Party. The result of this was a more unified government. Although many officials still disagreed with one another, as they were expected to, there were no longer the titanic battles that were present at the turn of the century. Because the politicians were less partisan, they were able to focus more on issues facing the nation and m...

    Read More

  • The Quasi War

    1827 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the country’s adolescence the United States encountered their first scenario when the suspension of certain rights seemed necessary: the Quasi War. In the late 1700s leaders of the French Revolution were frustrated with the United States and had signed an order that allowed the French to seize American merchant ships. President John Adams sent a delegation to Paris in an effort to maintain peaceful relations with the French. To the United States’ mortification Tallyrand, the French’s minister of foreign relations, refused to meet with this delegation and instead sent three agents to meet them instead. These agents (later known as agents XYZ) informed the delegation that the United States needs to give France a low-interest loan and pay a substantial bribe to Talleyrand. (Office of the Historian) When Adams presented this correspondence before Congress the Federalists cried out for war against the F...

    Read More

  • Individualistic and Traditionalistic Cultures in Texas

    1083 Words  | 3 Pages

    Newell, Charldean. "Inflexibility, Traditionalism, and Partisanship: The Texas Response to New Federalism." Review. Annual Review of American Federalism 12 (1981 (1983): 185-95. Publius. Oxford University Press. Web. 23 Mar. 2011.

    Read More

  • The Compromises of the Founding Fathers in Founding Brothers byJoseph J. Ellis

    644 Words  | 2 Pages

    compromise. Jefferson’s account suggests the growing divide, showing that without a mediator, the ideologies are too far divided to achieve legisla...

    Read More

  • Anti-Federalist vs Federalist

    2017 Words  | 5 Pages

    After winning the Revolutionary War and sovereign control of their home country from the British, Americans now had to deal with a new authoritative issue: who was to rule at home? In the wake of this massive authoritative usurpation, there were two primary views of how the new American government should function. Whereas part of the nation believed that a strong, central government would be the most beneficial for the preservation of the Union, others saw a Confederation of sovereign state governments as an option more supportive of the liberties American’s fought so hard for in the Revolution. Those in favor of a central government, the Federalists, thought this form of government was necessary to ensure national stability, unity and influence concerning foreign perception. Contrastingly, Anti-Federalists saw this stronger form of government as potentially oppressive and eerily similar to the authority’s tendencies of the British government they had just fought to remove. However, through the final ratification of the Constitution, new laws favoring state’s rights and the election at the turn of the century, one can say that the Anti-Federalist view of America prevails despite making some concessions in an effort to preserve the Union.

    Read More

More about John Jay's Treaty Analysis

Open Document