To some extent, the phrase “the Era of Good Feelings” reflected the political environment following the War of 1812. It was first used by the Boston Columbian Centinel on July 12, 1817, a Federalist newspaper, when President James Monroe visited Boston to gain his popular support after winning his presidential election in 1816. [1] The visit also epitomized the goodwill of Monroe and further strengthened the nationalism. Thus, it opened an era that inaugurated a period of national consensus between 1815 and 1825. During this period, the republic commenced a period of economic prosperity and reforms to promote nationalism after the war. [2] During the period, the transportation project began and Congress passed the tariff of 1816 to make American …show more content…
In spite of the strong nationalism and certain level of economic prosperity and reforms during the period, the nation also suffered many serious problems. For example, the tariff of 1816 did not actually protect the interests of the new manufacturers in the nation against the sever competition from Great Britain. What was worse, the Panic of 1819 caused dire economic catastrophes; consequently, Congress was forced to exact higher tariff later, which led to the emergence of sectionalism. As Feller points out, “When a higher tariff did finally pass Congress in 1824, the vote split starkly along regional lines. The mid-Atlantic, Ohio valley, and northwestern states voted overwhelmingly in favor, the plantation South just as strongly against….the program of tariff and internal improvement had in fact devolved in a few years from an almost consensual blueprint… to a bitterly contested sectional agenda.”[5] Furthermore, the issue of slavery emerged when the territory of Missouri asked for admission as a slave state. The controversy really caused a controversy in Congress and the threatened the balance between North and South although both reached the Missouri Compromise in 1820. [5] President Jefferson expressed his deep concern over the gap between North and South after the compromise, “But this momentous question, like a firebell in the night, awakened and filled me with
David A. Carson argues in “Blank Paper of the Constitution: The Louisiana Purchase Debates” that Thomas Jefferson did abandon his political ideals when purchasing Louisiana (P. 1). The Louisiana Territory gave the United States control of the Mississippi Valley and the mainland of North American, and it opened the doors for the expansion of slavery across the country (P. 3). Although the acquisition of Louisiana was important to the success and growth of the United States, Carson states that President Jefferson, “Saw that it threatened to make “blank paper” of the Constitution since it expanded the powers of the national government further than even the most die-hard Federalists could have imagined” (P. 3). On the 16th of July, two days after Jefferson received the purchased treaty, he called together his cabinet to help plan the course of the agreements through Congress (P. 4). The cabinet agreed to assemble Congress on the 17th of October to give both houses enough time to act before the closing day of October 30th (P. 4).
The United States began to dissatisfy some of its citizens and so the concerns of sectionalism, or the split of the country began to arise. There was a continuous riff between the south and the north over a few issues, a major one being slavery. The south argued that the slaves were necessary to support the southern economy. According to document A, the south were angry that the north was creating taxes that hurt the southern economy, thus increasing the need for slavery since they had to make up for the expense of the taxes. The south felt that the north was able...
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
After the War of 1812, America was heading into one of the the worst depressions ever in American history. Despite the many failures, the time after the war was known as “The Era of Good Feelings.” This was an inaccurate label for the selected time period. It is inaccurately labelled the “Era of Good Feelings” because of the weak economy, the terrible attempts by the government to keep the U.S. as one nation, and different views on slavery. As Andrew Jackson once said, “Peace, above all things, is to be desired, but blood must sometimes be spilled to obtain it on equable and lasting terms.”
The North was based on industrialism and the South on agriculture. Perhaps one of the greatest issues ever faced by the United States was that of slavery. The South had become extremely content with their way of life with slaves and the North were very against it. This caused many disagreements between the two regions and ultimately was one of the main causes of the Civil War. They also had different views on tariffs due to the difference in the economies. The North was booming with industrialization and they didn’t like competing with the goods being imported. The tariffs provided protection for the northern industries and in turn had a negative impact they had on the southern economy. This only amplified the uneasy feeling that the South felt about the Union. They feared the Union would grow too powerful and the people would eventually lose their voice. It was the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that opened the door and unleashed the beast that was sectionalism in the nation. After the compromise the North and South had a hard time agreeing on anything.
Crisis struck in 1820, when the North/South balance in the Senate was threatened by the application of Missouri to join the Union as a slave state. Southerners, aware of their numerical inferiority in the House of Representatives, were keen to maintain their political sway, in the Senate. The North feared that if Southerners were to take control of the Senate, political deadlock would ensue. Compromise was found in 1820 when Maine applied to join as a free state, maintaining the balance.
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.
Since the beginning of the Market Revolution, the institution of slavery became the leading factor that intensified the relations between the North and the South. Regarding the geographic differences between the North and South, the South was primarily agrarian and the North was mainly urban. Therefore, the North rapidly industrialized while the South remained relatively rural and cotton-slave based. As a result, the Market Revolution economically separated the North and the South and created a second party system. Thus, the issues of pro-slavery and anti-slavery arose between the Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans in the 1850s. The North desired to halt the expansion of slavery into western territories while the South strongly opposed. These two opposing parties led to radical abolitionism in the North, William Henry Seward and John Brown, and extreme secessionism in the South, James Henry Hammond, and South Carolina Ordinance of Secession. Due to their strict ideologies regarding slavery, both parties could not compromise on the issue of the expansion of slavery. Therefore, according to Americans in the years prior to the Civil War, conflict was inevitable.
North and South The United States of America, the great democratic experiment, was just that. Not since the great Greek culture had a government of, for, and by the people existed. The entire world felt, that on a large scale, democracy would inevitably lead to anarchy; our founding fathers were determined to prove them wrong. But as the political stand off with the British became a secession issue, a great issue split the future nation. Slavery, a southern necessity, both social and economic, threatened the unity of our nation. A nation that would one day be the greatest the world had ever known. During the development of the thirteen colonies, diversity set in early. In the south the temperate climate made the growth of tobacco a suitable and very profitable business. Cultivation of this crop required a lot of land, and therefore settlers lived far apart. Northern Colonies, though, were much more dependent on small farms, with closely knit communities. These differences were the seed of a sectional division that would plague the nation for a century. During the late seventeenth century, this fissure in the ideals of the colonies became apparent. Following the constant political irreverence from Britain, a majority of colonial representatives felt the need for independence. The Declaration of Independence was the document written to do this. It called for an abolition of slavery as well as freedom from British rule. Unfortunately, the South would hear nothing of it. Being strong defenders of states rights, most of the Southern states adhered to their believe in a government less like a supreme authority and more like a dominion of independent states. They would rather stay loyal to their oppressive government than participate in one that shunned their way of life. In order to keep their dreams of independence, they North was forced to make the one cession they did not wish to make. In order to keep a unified nation, the slavery issue was deliberately absent from the Declaration. Some of the Northern delegates were outraged, but none more than John Adams. A renowned proponent of equal rights, he was one of few that saw the irony in establishing a free society without freeing those in bondage. John Adams seems now more like Nostrodamus when he voiced his concern about the slavery issue for future generations. He did not know it, but the couldn’t have been more right.
The federal tariff policy definitely played a what kind of role in the development and acceptance of nullification in South Carolina. In fact, in “South Carolina’s Exposition and Protest,” John C. Calhoun specifically pointed to the unjust and oppressive nature of the tariffs to justify his nullification theories. Without doubt, South Carolina’s economy clearly suffered during 1816 to 1832 as the price of cotton fell and the prices of imports rose. Whether justified or not, many South Carolinians blamed the federal tariffs in part because of the exaggerated and emotional reports of the press, Hayne, and McDuffie. Because their economic interests were impaired, South Carolinians were looking for something to blame and a way to respond. The federal tariff policy was an easy target, and nullification provided a dramatic way to take action.
Tempers raged and arguments started because of the Missouri Compromise. The simple act caused many fatal events because of what was changed within the United States. It may not seem like a big thing now, but before slavery had been abolished, the topic of slavery was an idea that could set off fights. The Missouri Compromise all started in late in 1819 when the Missouri Territory applied to the Union to become a slave state. The problem Congress had with accepting Missouri as a slave state was the new uneven count of free states and slave states. With proslavery states and antislavery states already getting into arguments, having a dominant number of either slave or free states would just ignite the flame even more. Many representatives from the north, such as James Tallmadge of New York, had already tried to pass another amendment that would abolish slavery everywhere. Along with other tries to eliminate slavery, his effort was soon shot down. The fact that people couldn’t agree on whether or not slavery should be legalized made trying to compose and pass a law nearly impossible.
The North and the South had been sectionalized for years on many issues, yet the majority of the congressmen had still come together when necessary for the good of the Nation, up until 1854. After Lincoln won the election in 1860, the nation was divided by sectionalism. Due to the Nation being divided and the Southerners being paranoid about the slaves being freed, I believe both issues were causes that led to the Civil War. Works Cited Brands, H. W.. American Stories: A History of the United States. New York: Routledge, 1998 2nd ed.
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
...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)
After the war of 1812, the United States saw a nationalist spark begin to ignite. The emergence of nationalism was largely due to the Hartford Convention and the federalists’ call for secession from the union. With the end of the war, the Federalist Party diminished and the Republican Party emerged with no opposition. Feelings of pride, national unity, and patriotism were evoked, as seen in a picture depicting Fourth of July festivités in Philadelphia in 1819 (Doc C). Just as the Fourth of July celebration illustrates nationalism, the diary of secretary of state John Quincy Adams did as well. He implored and suggested that the United States take a firm stand against Britain and Spain, Russia and Prussia (Doc H). President Monroe was concerned that the United States not appear subordinate to Britain. In 1823 the Monroe Doctrine was proclaimed, and asserted the authority of the United States. As well as having fears that the United States not appear subordinat...