“Good Feelings” The “Era of Good Feelings,” beginning after the war of 1812 and lasting into the 1820s, is typically represented as a positive time in American history full of nationalism. However, in considering this time period, one remember to examine both the positive nationalistic perspective and the negative sectionalist perspective. Socially, after the war of 1812, the American morale was strengthened and nationalism grew. Politically, the collapse of the Federalist party after the Hartford convention lead to a more united voting population, having only one viable party to vote for. Economically, the national bank expanded its power and protective tariffs were issued, which were looked upon negatively in the south, causing division 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 Document D presents the issue of the national bank, which was a hotly contested issue for most of the nation’s history. The decision to force states to allow the national bank reiterated the issue of state powers versus federal powers. This issue showed clear divisions between the northern states, who were more supportive of federal powers, and the southern states, who were more in favor of states rights. The financial decisions made in the Era of Good Feelings were often perceived as benefitting the southern states more than the northern states, causing separatism. Document A presents the issues of the Tariff of 1816. As demonstrated in the document, the southerners felt unfairly taxed, and did not feel as if they were getting anything out of the taxation. This type of disagreement about tariffs would continue, eventually leading to greater separatism and division. For these reasons, the title “The Era of Good Feelings” inaccuratly sums up the economic occurrences after the war of
...ke George Washington especially had veritable fortunes personally vested in the outcome. His work makes it apparent also that this was not a localized protest comprised of a mere handful of ardent participants from what was then the extreme fringe of American civilization, but rather the dissent was in fact a wide-spread crisis, which very much had the potential to be the undoing of the new nation. Slaughter reveals the extreme sectionalism which plagued the nation throughout its first century of existence was well established prior to the dawn of the nineteenth century. He asserts also that the precedent was set regarding the question of national versus state or local authority, which has continued in effect since.
South Carolina’s decision to invalidate the federal law and deem the tariff unconstitutional was the first blatant disregard for the centralized government. The United States, under Jackson’s presidency, did not unite and support one another in the face of the economic tariff and hardships. Instead, the states nullified (South Carolina in particular) and the individualistic ideals and motivations of the states were exposed. State opinions, such as that of South Carolina were focused solely on their own personal benefit and how they would survive the hardships of the tariff. During the Age of Jackson, there was no unification between the states. The ideals of Jacksonian America were flawed by the growing sectionalism and individualistic ideals. The total equality and unification that Jacksonian America attempted to create was no longer an option. Jacksonian America failed, and in result, did not promote the unified democracy in the United
In addition to a crumbling national identity, the necessities of war diminished morale among citizens of the Confederacy. Early on, the South believed that Europe would a...
Prior to the “Era of Good Feelings”, America was characterized as a nation where people did not recognize themselves in union but instead identified themselves according their region. During this period America became more integrated (politically, socially and economically) and a sense of nationalism prevailed. In the years following the War of 1812 America 's status on the world stage strengthened, the economy grew and became more prosperous due to the market revolution, and new forms of transportation and their improvements connected the country in ways that had not been seen before. Despite this rise in nationalism, there were also some elements of sectionalism that had existed since colonization.
By the end of the dispute, the opposition(Federalists) came out on top, and the road was never built, but it shows the first, strong, divergence in the populace of our. nation since its inception. All of the above examples are all representative of issues of the time. which played a large role in sectionalism, and the breakup of the United States.
...mfortable and stubborn, resisting the change that was coming about in the country. The North being so eager to expand and industrialize the country and establish their independency from the British. Somewhere along the road, the states stopped working toward a common goal and became more concerned with their own well-being. With each attempt made to keep the states united, they were only building up more harsh feeling toward each other. Even with all the ill feelings between the regions because of their sectionalism, the South succeeding from the union and a war being fought within our own nation, our people against our people, the United States managed to struggle through the sectionalism of 19th century and remain one nation, united.
1817 to 1825—a period of time that oversaw the presidency of the 5th U.S. president, James Monroe, whose term in office later became known as the Era of Good Feelings. The end of the War of 1812 and the "Era of Good Feelings" are often viewed as a time of cultural, economic and political nationalism; however during the era, the tension between nationalism and sectionalism began to rise. Issues about the tariff and the bank were constantly being fought over, inevitably dividing society. Not only had that split society, but the conflicts of slavery began to greatly rise, which created the problem of sectionalism, which led to Henry Clay’s Missouri Compromise in 1820. Many areas had differing views on slavery and voting, which only strengthened the belief that sectionalism was taking over the smidgeon of nationalism that lingered.
The difference between the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and the Nullification Crisis brought on by the Tariff of 1828 was economic...
Roark, J.L., Johnson, M.P., Cohen, P.C., Stage, S., Lawson, A., Hartmann, S.M. (2009). The american promise: A history of the united states (4th ed.), The New West and Free North 1840-1860, The slave south, 1820-1860, The house divided 1846-1861 (Vol. 1, pp. 279-354).
The Articles failed to provide a solid monetary system to ensure that taxes would be paid or to protect commerce. Congress had no way to collect taxes to pay off pre-war debts. This led to chaos and anarchy when soldiers realized that there is a delay in what they requested (Document C). Each State had its own money, but there was no national money system. Since the money had no value from state to state, the people began to use the barter system of trade. This reduced the amount of trade and importation of goods. There was very little economic progress and growth during this period even though the population was increasing. (Document B). Self interest of the States and of individuals added to the cause of the problems. For example, John Jay tried to create a treaty with Great Britain that would have been bad for the merchants of the United States but it would have paid off the war debt.
As the country began to grow and expand we continued to see disagreements between the North and South; the Missouri Territory applied for statehood the South wanted them admitted as a slave state and the North as a free state. Henry Clay eventually came up with the Missouri Compromise, making Missouri a slave state and making Maine it’s own state entering the union as a free state. After this compromise any state admitted to the union south of the 36° 30’ latitude would be a slave state and a state north of it would be free. The country was very much sectionalized during this time. Thomas Jefferson felt this was a threat to the Union. In 1821, he wrote, ”All, I fear, do not see the speck on our horizon which is to burst on us as a tornado, sooner or later. The line of division lately marked out between the different portions of our confederacy is such...
In the years of 1830 through 1860, a breach in the unity between the North and the South of the United States occurred. They faced an
The Civil War has been viewed as the unavoidable eruption of a conflict that had been simmering for decades between the industrial North and the agricultural South. Roark et al. (p. 507) speak of the two regions’ respective “labor systems,” which in the eyes of both contemporaries were the most salient evidence of two irreconcilable worldviews. Yet the economies of the two regions were complementary to some extent, in terms of the exchange of goods and capital; the Civil War did not arise because of economic competition between the North and South over markets, for instance. The collision course that led to the Civil War did not have its basis in pure economics as much as in the perceptions of Northerners and Southerners of the economies of the respective regions in political and social terms. The first lens for this was what I call the nation’s ‘charter’—the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the documents spelling out the nation’s core ideology. Despite their inconsistencies, they provided a standard against which the treatment and experience of any or all groups of people residing within the United States could be evaluated (Native Americans, however, did not count). Secondly, these documents had installed a form of government that to a significant degree promised representation of each individual citizen. It was understood that this only possible through aggregation, and so population would be a major source of political power in the United States. This is where economics intersected with politics: the economic system of the North encouraged (albeit for the purposes of exploitation) immigration, whereas that of the South did not. Another layer of the influence of economics in politics was that the prosperity of ...
compromise. Jefferson’s account suggests the growing divide, showing that without a mediator, the ideologies are too far divided to achieve legisla...
...nited States, was poorly executed by both sides and ended in 1814 with no major changes. In ensuing years, tensions eased between the United States and Britain and the two nations grew closer economically. The United States also gained Florida from Spain (for $5 million) and established boundaries with Mexico. And in 1823 the United States issued the Monroe Doctrine, stating that while it would respect already-existing European colonies in the Western Hemisphere and try to stay out of European affairs, the United States would treat any attempt to extend European control in the hemisphere as a hostile gesture. Although this period is often called the Era of Good Feelings, shadows of sectionalism were arising as powerful regional leaders gained prominence. The first of many conflicts on slavery was resolved with the Missouri Compromise (1820). (Image: National Archives)