Thursday, October 2, 2014

Week seven day four (or three): The Great Triumvirate

As we learned in class, the Great Triumvirate was the name given to the group of Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and John C. Calhoun. These three men dominated American politics for much of 19th century, wielding influence from the War of 1812 until the early 1850s. These three men, despite their huge differences in background and style, were remarkably similar in their careers and are inseparable in discussions of 19th century politics.

Henry Clay was the oldest of the three, born in Virginia in 1777. He first served as a Senator from Kentucky in 1806, and stayed in politics until his death in 1852. He ran for president three times, losing all three (in 1824, 1832, and 1844). Despite the bad presidential election record, he served as Secretary of State once and Speaker of the House of Representatives three times. Clay is probably best known for his title of the Great Pacificator or the Great Compromiser.  His idea to help pacify the relations between President Jackson and the South over tariffs in 1833 (creatively called Clay's Compromise Tariff of 1833), and he was the one who first thought of the Great Compromise of 1850.

Daniel Webster was rather stereotypically northeastern in his political choices, usually looking out most for the industrious New England. He was largely considered the greatest orator of his time, and used his talents well. He was the most vocal unionist, and his debate against states'-rights advocate Robert Y. Hayne is famous. He served as Secretary of State twice.

As Webster was very northeastern, John C. Calhoun was amazingly southern. He was one of the most vocal politicians for states' rights, especially during the Nullification Crisis, and was also actively pro-slavery. He served as vice president for two very different presidents: John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson.

Despite their differences, all three shared an opposition to Andrew Jackson, though all for different reasons. Clay didn't like the man who'd beaten him; Webster (the New Englander) didn't like Jackson's new style of democracy and anti-bank policies; Calhoun hated how Jackson treated the south, even going so far as to resign from the position of vice president.


1 comment:

  1. Hey Josh! Just wanted to say that this was a super duper insightful post! Thanks so much for doing such a thorough job.
    Here is a link that I found that totally corresponds to exactly what you were saying.
    http://www.ushistory.org/us/30c.asp

    I think it's interesting to consider what it would be like had these guys been a bit younger. A lot of what made them less effective in government was their age. They really seemed like the remaining tendrils of the old government. Had they been even a bit younger, it seems that they would have clearly dominated the government in this unstable time with the conflict between the North and South. Would Clay have run again, or was he so demoralized from losing? Why did Webster never run for president even though he is considered one of the best orators? Would Calhoun have taken a stronger stance for the Southern cause?
    Something very interesting that Josh did note was that "despite their differences, all three shared an opposition to Andrew Jackson, though all for different reasons." I liked that a lot because it otherwise doesn't make sense why the men would ever collaborate on anything semi-peacefully. Just like how the Republican party was birthed from an aspersion to the Democrats, the Great Triumvirate came together due to an aspersion for Jackson.

    ReplyDelete