November 16, 1860
With the idea of secession permeating the public discourse, there were questions of whether states even had the right to secede. These questions were not confined to academics and lawyers; even the newspapers of New York City explored these questions—one of which, the New York Daily News, was a conservative newspaper that had supported John C. Breckinridge in the election of 1860.
(more…)November 15, 1860
There is an assumption that people throughout the South were the only ones calling for a dissolution of the Union. This is a faulty assumption; there were people in the North who saw no potential for reconciliation and called for dissolution. Some people even argued that the Constitution’s acknowledgement of slavery was a basis to set it aside and to replace it with a document that reestablished the republic without the institution of slavery—albeit a republic comprised of only those states that would not tolerate slavery.
(more…)Independent Journal (New York)
January 26, 1788
A nation comprised of states (or provinces) will inevitably have tension between the national government and each of the state governments. Most frequently, at the center of that tension is sovereignty; one state’s policy preference may be anathema to another state.
(more…)
November 9, 1860
One of the most famous newspapermen of his time, Horace Greeley, almost always had a sharp opinion, and with his newspaper, the New-York Daily Tribune, he had an audience. With the ubiquitous talk of secession during and after the election of 1860, Greeley had an opportunity to bring a more sober, well-reasoned approach to the issue.With that, perhaps he could resolve some of the tension that had developed between the North and South and assist in averting what seemed then to be an inevitable crisis.
Horace Greeley (1811-1872) was a prominent American newspaper editor and publisher during the 19th century.
Greeley was a strong opponent of slavery and was a vocal supporter of the Union cause during the Civil War.
November 5-6, 1860
Who won the presidential election of 1860 would shape the following weeks and months—not because the winner would immediately take power; but because the direction of the country would come into focus. Perhaps the South would avoid its worst fear of having a Black Republican in the White House. Or perhaps their worst fear would become reality: Abraham Lincoln would win the election; then, there would be no choice but to go on with seceding between the election—in November—and the inauguration—in March. And then, for the South, there would finally be a cause for conflict; and not just a conflict of words but, for some, an overdue start to warfare with the North.
(more…)New-York Packet
January 25, 1788
The Federalist XLIV [James Madison] Part II Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution has long sparked controversy, granting Congress the power to create necessary and proper laws to execute its other powers. James Madison, in the Federalist Papers, defended this provision against those who deemed it excessive. For Constitution supporters, the Clause was crucial to prevent Congress from becoming ineffective and unimportant compared to state legislatures. James Madison argued that the Clause was essential, otherwise, the Constitution would become meaningless.
Everywhere in the city, which had become his home, there were reminders of the inspiration he had brought.
With the Civil War’s end, the United States had put itself back on course to become one of the leading economies in the world. Economic strength begets influence around the world, and America was no exception to this principle; it now was entering an era—an era that, as of the time of this writing, has not come to a close—of taking part in directing the world’s affairs. More than that, America now had the potential to reshape parts of the world in its image. After all, this was the 19th Century, and the era of empires was arguably at its peak—although its sun was setting. For the time, there was an expectation: if you had the opportunity and resources to expand, to take more land and more people into your orbit, you took full use of the opportunity. To abstain from this mode of operation was to concede a wealth of riches, and indulging in the taking of those riches was no cause for shame; every one of the major powers—some for decades, some for centuries—had carved up a part of the world, had made their own empire.
(more…)New-York Packet
January 25, 1788
In a country comprised of states, there is bound to be overlap between what those states’ governments may do and what the federal government may do. But the draft Constitution clarified those boundaries and identified many of the rights that states have and don’t have. Crucially, the Constitution sets limits for what states may do to hinder their economies and to prosecute criminal behavior.
(more…)New York Journal
January 24, 1788
History is replete with military coups. At a time when a country’s government has grown weak, the temptation to make drastic change can become overwhelming. Sometimes, rather than wait for the next election, the military makes its move—to the detriment of the democracy, the people, and the chances for protecting the people’s rights. There are some who believe that the best way to prevent such coups is to prohibit having a standing army altogether. In 1788, an author, using the pen name Brutus, saw that the liberties of the people faced imminent threat if there was a “large standing army” allowed in the United States and made the case that the Constitution should prohibit such an army as it created too much of a danger to the viability of the Republic.
(more…)Independent Gazetteer (Philadelphia)
January 23, 1788
When a group of people conspire, their interests are aligned to work toward a result and bring about that result. The reasons for participating in a conspiracy may be varied, but often, enriching oneself—either with money, influence, or power—is at the heart of it. Conspiracies are usually simple in design as enriching oneself need not be overly complicated. But, it is the allegation of grander conspiracies that often capture the public’s attention and imagination. Sometimes, this is because those grander conspiracies can explain the world’s events—which are often overwhelming and complex—in a clear, definite way. These conspiracies aren’t the type for which believers require detailed evidence; adherents would say that these conspiracies involve too many people with power and money to leave a trail of evidentiary breadcrumbs back to the wrongdoers. In their view, the most damning evidence simply cannot exist. Nonetheless, believers will find what they can, however weak or speculative or trivial it may be, and have no choice but to rely on it because otherwise the allegation of conspiracy collapses in on itself. And there is motivation to do this: it may be easier to maintain that facade of a conspiracy by adding to it weak evidence than to confront the complex realities of the world. It was within this context, at the beginning of 1788, that Samuel Bryan published an article in Philadelphia that, in his view, finally called out the framers of the Constitution, the Federalists, for the conspirators that they were.
(more…)
Last Best Hope of Earth 