Tori Meakem
APUSH
Mr. Davisson
23 May 2009
Interpretations of the Constitution and Political Events in 1800-1840
	The early 1800s was a period in which American leaders needed to experiment and to establish the nature of politics and the role of the federal government, state governments, and the citizens in the new American country. During this period there was a mix between continuation of the ideals of the Constitution and changes to the ideals. At this time, developments moved farther away from the ideals of the Constitution, and resulted in two major political factions, a strong executive branch, a stronger judicial branch, and increased power to the common people, all of which the Constitution had not intended.
	The writers of the Constitution had intended for the government to be more republican than democratic. The word “democracy” is not once mentioned in the Constitution (“Democracy”). In truth, the members attending the constitutional convention, such as Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Dickinson and George Washington, were fairly conservative and feared mob rule. (Kennedy). They realized how chaotic America would be without a stronger central government after the outbreak of Shay’s Rebellion (Kennedy). The more radical figures, such as Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson, were absent from the convention (Kennedy). The main goal of these writers was to create a document which would have enough flexibility to last throughout the ages and withstand domestic and foreign conflicts, but enough immutability to prevent dangerously broad interpretations leading to the violation of personal liberties.
	During the early 1800s, Americans had to continue to determine the balance between the state and the federal government. This would be a continuing issue throughout American history that would eventually cause the Civil War and that continues to be debated today. The writers of the Constitution outlined the major roles of the federal government and the state government. Their intent was that there would be a strong national government to maintain good foreign relations and resolve domestic issues, but that the states still have some power (Kennedy). Therefore, the Bill of Rights, supported by many more radical Anti-Federalists, contained a 10th  Amendment which would ensure that the federal government would not take away power from the states (Kennedy). The 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people” (“United”). This vague statement caused many Americans to support the idea of nullification, in which a state is able to nullify a law that they believe is unconstitutional (Kennedy). This was used by Jefferson and Madison in the Virginia Resolution and the Kentucky Resolution, both of which nullified Adams’ Alien and Sedition Acts (Kennedy). John C. Calhoun also used this concept in the 1932 Nullification Crisis, in which South Carolina nullified a tariff (Kennedy). This crisis was a precursor to the Civil War. 
Many people who supported states’ rights also held strict interpretations of the Constitution. Examples of those who held strict interpretations of the Constitution were Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (Kennedy). Jefferson explained his interpretation by saying:
On every question of construction let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed (Dearmore).

Jefferson assumed that the writers of the Constitution intended for it to be interpreted strictly. In contrast, others believe that the Constitution was written in intentionally vague language. In 2009, a book titled Keeping Faith with the Constitution argues that the writers of the Constitution ”inscribed our fundamental values into the Constitution with broad language and expansive principles open to future interpretation” (Wydra). It further describes the Constitution as a “visionary document”, and one intended to be interpreted differently as time progresses (Wydra). One of the most notable broad contstuctionists of the 1800s was Alexander Hamilton (Kennedy). During this period, the interpretation of the Constitution seemed to become more broad as time went on. This can be shown in examples such as the Jeffersonian embargo, the Monroe Doctrine, the Louisiana Purchase, and Hamilton’s National Bank. However, at the same time the strongest supporters of broad constructionists, the Federalists, fell apart in the 1810s while the political party of Jefferson only grew stronger (Kennedy). This shows that, although the broad constructionist view was ultimately accepted, the political parties which the Founding Fathers so hated actually kept the interpretation of the Constitution balanced, so that most actions ended up being compromises. In this regard, what the writers of the Constitution intended and what actually occurred were essentially the same.
After the election of 1800, the first partisan election, the nature of politics in the United States started to differ from what the writers of the Constitution had intended. The writers of the Constitution had spoken disparagingly of political parties or factions. George Washington warned of them in his Farewell Address from the presidency, saying: 
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. (“Living”)

James Madison, author of Federalist paper 51 and referred to as the “Father of the Constitution” agrees by describing the benefits of having many different factions instead of a large political party:
Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority that is, of the society itself; the other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable…The second method will be exemplified in the federal republic of the United States (“Federalist 51”).

Madison and Washington both agreed that America should have many different factions and that each individual should vote according to their own beliefs, and hoped to avoid partisanship. However, what actually occurred was the development of a two party system, which would dominate American politics throughout its history, continuing today with the Democrat and Republican parties (Kennedy). During this period, not only did two political parties develop, but also unique American aspects of elections developed. At this time, the first truly divided election occurred in 1800, and was the first peaceful transfer of power involving the two parties of Jefferson and Adams (Kennedy). This may seem insignificant now, but the fact that the exchange of power occurred peacefully started the tradition of peaceful elections that has continued throughout American history. The developments of “mudslinging” and political cartoons also occurred at this time, and were extremely fierce in the 1824 election between Adams and Jackson (Kennedy). Politicians quickly learned what the people liked to hear and how to get successfully elected. In order to get elected in American politics, the candidate could not be aristocratic and needed to appeal to the common people. Examples of this are Jefferson, who was very informal and once entertained people in his dressing gown and slippers, and Jackson, who was elected on the basis of appealing to the common man (Kennedy). After Jackson, candidates were mainly from the west, and were often war heroes (Kennedy). Politicians learned that the honest, informal candidate who was often involved in the military appealed to voters more than seemingly aristocratic candidates, which explains why John Adams and John Quincy Adams were both unpopular and served only one term each (Kennedy). Another thing that politicians learned was the power of the media. In order to win an election, a candidate must appeal to the newspapers. All these developments shaped American politics to what it is today.
The writers of the Constitution intended that the government be more republican than democratic. This changed during the election of Andrew Jackson and the advent of populism. Populism is defined as “the political doctrine that supports the rights and powers of the common people in their struggle with the privileged elite” (“Populism”). During this time, a trend developed in which more power was given to the people. This is shown by the increase of voting rates, which reached 78% by 1840 (Kennedy). Reasons for this populism included the Second Great Awakening, which gave the congregation more power in the church government (Kennedy). Also, involvement in reform groups such as abolition, temperance, prison reform, and women’s suffrage caused individuals to desire more self-government (Kennedy). Also, by 1820, 2 million Americans out of the total population of 10 million lived west of the Appalachian Mountains  (Jaffe). The westerners were less aristocratic than the East-coast societies dominated by the influential planters. Those living in the west were also independent and freedom-loving, due to the roughness of frontier life. As the people gained more influence in society, they demanded more political influence as well, taking power from the more aristocratic or traditional legislative branches to the hands of the common people. This was a contrast with the Constitution, which is clearly written to avoid not only the corruptions of a dictator, but also the dangers of mob rule. As the 1800s progressed, America became more democratic than republican, despite the intentions of the Constitution.
	During this period, not only did the power of the common people increase, but also the power of the judicial and executive branches. The increase of power of the Supreme Court was due to the work of John Marshall, the Chief Justice who developed the idea of judicial review, which gave the Supreme Court the ability to judge the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress or the actions of the President (Kennedy). The power of the president increased significantly primarily during the term of Andrew Jackson, in the unprecedented amount he used the presidential veto (Kennedy). He used it more than all the other past presidents combined (“Jackson”), leading some critical Whigs to label him as “King Jackson”, and viewing him as the dangerous result of mob rule (Kennedy). Jackson pointed out one power of the Executive Branch that made it superior to the Judicial, when he told Marshall, “Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it” (Kennedy). Ironically, the writers of the Constitution had intended for the Legislative Branch to be the voice of the people and the most powerful branch. Madison affirmed this when he said, “It is not possible to give each department an equal power of self-defense. In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates” (“Fed. 51”). Despite this intention, in this period both the Judicial and Executive Branches gained power, with the Executive branch becoming the most powerful.
	The writers of the Constitution strived to maintain a balance between having a too-powerful executive branch and a too-powerful people group resulting in mob rule. The goals of the Constitution for the most part succeeded, in that they maintained a government full of checks and balances and allowed the peaceful transition of power for over 200 years after it was written. However, some events happened in the early 1800s which the Constitution did not intend, such as the development of two political parties, populism, and the growth of the executive branch. The vagueness and the development of broad construction of the constitution allowed the document to maintain its flexibility and last for over two centuries, but also led to debates and conflicts over interpretations of the Constitution.

Works Cited

“Andrew Jackson.” History Central. 25 May 2009. 
http://www.historycentral.com/Bio/presidents/jackson.html 

Dearmore, James. “Jefferson on ‘Strict’ Construction of the Constitution.” 
Gospelweb.net. 10 Feb. 2006. 21 May 2009. http://www.gospelweb.net/CultureWar/jeffersonstrictconstitution.htm.

“Democracy.” 	Republic Rules. 25 May 2009. 
http://www.republicrules.com/government/31/pop-quiz-democracy.

“Federalist 51.” Founding Fathers. 23 May 2009. 
http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed51.htm.

Jaffe, David. “Post-Revolutionary America: 1800-1840.” metmuseum.org. 5/21/09. 
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/pram/hd_pram.htm.

Kennedy, David M, Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas A. Bailey. “The Triumphs and Travails 
of the Jeffersonian Republic”; “The Rise of Mass Democracy”; “The Ferment of Reform and Culture.” The American Pageant. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006.211-347. 

 “Living up to the Founding Generation’s Vision.” Thecommoninterest.org. 5/21/09. 
http://www.thecommoninterest.org/v2/Default-3.aspx.

“Populism.” Word Net. 25 May 2009.
http://www.google.com/url?&q=http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn%3Fs%3Dpopulism&ei=L3QYSrvXMcPWlAfiu9HKCw&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&usg=AFQjCNGE8V9FJ0bOIa0BNvHgbiFkGkhE0A

“United States Constitution.” Cornell University. 5/21/09. 
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html.

Wydra, Elizabeth. “New ACS Book on Constitutional Change Published at Key Time.” 
American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. 4 May 2009. 23 May 23, 2009. http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/topic/202.