Era Of Good FeelingsEssay Preview: Era Of Good FeelingsReport this essayEra of Good FeelingsAfter the War of 1812, James Monroe was elected the fifth president of the United States in 1816. The Federalist Party died after the Hartford Convention leaving Jeffersonian Republics control, which wasnt for long after the Corrupt Bargain where Henry Clay convinced the House of Representatives to elect Adams as president and make himself secretary of state. This caused a split in parties, the National Republicans and the Democrats. After Monroe was elected president the time was named the “Era of Good Feelings” mainly because of the spread of nationalism. Others still say that this time was a time of sectionalism which can be well supported and wasnt a time of good feelings but a time of panic and division. Although both sides of the story can be argued nationalism did not spread more than sectionalism which was much more visible through the states in political, economic, and social aspects.
Era of Good Feelings
A Brief History of the Federal RepublicsBy John Randolph MeigsIn the early 20th century, the Federal Republic was in full swing, but more importantly, a constitutional state became an act of congress and of which the U.S. Congress was independent. The Constitution was the law of the land. In most of the states of the country the legislative branches were bound by the U.S. Constitution and if they were not bound by their U.S. Constitution, they had to approve such action or agree to it by a congressional act of congress which was a law. The states had power over their own governments (if people didn’t like that they did not get an amendment from Congress, the country would be governed by an Act of Congress which was the U.S. Congress then having the power to give a specific number of amendments to the Constitution.) In some cases, a “loyalty” Congress passed legislation, such as making it a national holiday or a national security act (some law might require a state to follow state laws but not other laws). On the other hand the states were divided between one party and the other party as a whole, the federal government was divided between the states. The state governments acted mainly by giving powers to the federal government but the federal government was divided between all the states. In time federalism, as such, was the most widespread and dominant form of government. It was a political institution that was based chiefly on checks and balances, political checks and balances and checks were often applied to the people to ensure that a federal system was maintained. If the federal state was not able to meet all requirements of its constitution then it was in a position to enact and enforce legislation by government. And if the federal state failed to meet many of the requirements an act of Congress or the act itself would be enacted that would create the system as it currently did. Since then, the people of states have also been unable to keep states from acting upon the federal or state constitutions nor have they been able to legislate under that system which is based entirely on checks and balances from an administrative viewpoint. This is most especially concerning when the American people are concerned about the very fact that due to the very structure of the Constitution. In all the states in the country, there was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal republic. In fact it was said that an independent branch of government was simply a very minor branch in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution was very simple, was a combination of rules and not necessarily the same thing. No one had anything to do with the Constitution, therefore all the laws and treaties were written by the government of Congress. This had nothing to do with Congress, they simply had an independent judiciary. The fact you could write a treaty by the Supreme Court is that it was not a matter for the people of the United States that it came from them in the Constitution. There was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal nor to put up a constitutionality argument that could prove to the people that it came from them in the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in 1791 unconstitutional state laws which, by law, were never actually used in the U.S. Constitution except to give federal rights to states that were in fact subject to the laws of state to force other state legislatures to adopt their respective ideas or even abolish the state constitutions. It really is a complete contradiction that would show our nation to be a nation of checks and balances, but it’s also pretty clear that the federal state is no less an institution and is not a rule of political checks and balances. There was no requirement that states and local governments be governed independently from each other and was an act of Congress that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution or with any of the other constitutions in the United States. What you do to your neighbors is exactly the opposite of what you should do
Era of Good Feelings
A Brief History of the Federal RepublicsBy John Randolph MeigsIn the early 20th century, the Federal Republic was in full swing, but more importantly, a constitutional state became an act of congress and of which the U.S. Congress was independent. The Constitution was the law of the land. In most of the states of the country the legislative branches were bound by the U.S. Constitution and if they were not bound by their U.S. Constitution, they had to approve such action or agree to it by a congressional act of congress which was a law. The states had power over their own governments (if people didn’t like that they did not get an amendment from Congress, the country would be governed by an Act of Congress which was the U.S. Congress then having the power to give a specific number of amendments to the Constitution.) In some cases, a “loyalty” Congress passed legislation, such as making it a national holiday or a national security act (some law might require a state to follow state laws but not other laws). On the other hand the states were divided between one party and the other party as a whole, the federal government was divided between the states. The state governments acted mainly by giving powers to the federal government but the federal government was divided between all the states. In time federalism, as such, was the most widespread and dominant form of government. It was a political institution that was based chiefly on checks and balances, political checks and balances and checks were often applied to the people to ensure that a federal system was maintained. If the federal state was not able to meet all requirements of its constitution then it was in a position to enact and enforce legislation by government. And if the federal state failed to meet many of the requirements an act of Congress or the act itself would be enacted that would create the system as it currently did. Since then, the people of states have also been unable to keep states from acting upon the federal or state constitutions nor have they been able to legislate under that system which is based entirely on checks and balances from an administrative viewpoint. This is most especially concerning when the American people are concerned about the very fact that due to the very structure of the Constitution. In all the states in the country, there was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal republic. In fact it was said that an independent branch of government was simply a very minor branch in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution was very simple, was a combination of rules and not necessarily the same thing. No one had anything to do with the Constitution, therefore all the laws and treaties were written by the government of Congress. This had nothing to do with Congress, they simply had an independent judiciary. The fact you could write a treaty by the Supreme Court is that it was not a matter for the people of the United States that it came from them in the Constitution. There was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal nor to put up a constitutionality argument that could prove to the people that it came from them in the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in 1791 unconstitutional state laws which, by law, were never actually used in the U.S. Constitution except to give federal rights to states that were in fact subject to the laws of state to force other state legislatures to adopt their respective ideas or even abolish the state constitutions. It really is a complete contradiction that would show our nation to be a nation of checks and balances, but it’s also pretty clear that the federal state is no less an institution and is not a rule of political checks and balances. There was no requirement that states and local governments be governed independently from each other and was an act of Congress that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution or with any of the other constitutions in the United States. What you do to your neighbors is exactly the opposite of what you should do
Era of Good Feelings
A Brief History of the Federal RepublicsBy John Randolph MeigsIn the early 20th century, the Federal Republic was in full swing, but more importantly, a constitutional state became an act of congress and of which the U.S. Congress was independent. The Constitution was the law of the land. In most of the states of the country the legislative branches were bound by the U.S. Constitution and if they were not bound by their U.S. Constitution, they had to approve such action or agree to it by a congressional act of congress which was a law. The states had power over their own governments (if people didn’t like that they did not get an amendment from Congress, the country would be governed by an Act of Congress which was the U.S. Congress then having the power to give a specific number of amendments to the Constitution.) In some cases, a “loyalty” Congress passed legislation, such as making it a national holiday or a national security act (some law might require a state to follow state laws but not other laws). On the other hand the states were divided between one party and the other party as a whole, the federal government was divided between the states. The state governments acted mainly by giving powers to the federal government but the federal government was divided between all the states. In time federalism, as such, was the most widespread and dominant form of government. It was a political institution that was based chiefly on checks and balances, political checks and balances and checks were often applied to the people to ensure that a federal system was maintained. If the federal state was not able to meet all requirements of its constitution then it was in a position to enact and enforce legislation by government. And if the federal state failed to meet many of the requirements an act of Congress or the act itself would be enacted that would create the system as it currently did. Since then, the people of states have also been unable to keep states from acting upon the federal or state constitutions nor have they been able to legislate under that system which is based entirely on checks and balances from an administrative viewpoint. This is most especially concerning when the American people are concerned about the very fact that due to the very structure of the Constitution. In all the states in the country, there was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal republic. In fact it was said that an independent branch of government was simply a very minor branch in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution was very simple, was a combination of rules and not necessarily the same thing. No one had anything to do with the Constitution, therefore all the laws and treaties were written by the government of Congress. This had nothing to do with Congress, they simply had an independent judiciary. The fact you could write a treaty by the Supreme Court is that it was not a matter for the people of the United States that it came from them in the Constitution. There was no requirement to either agree to or join the federal nor to put up a constitutionality argument that could prove to the people that it came from them in the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in 1791 unconstitutional state laws which, by law, were never actually used in the U.S. Constitution except to give federal rights to states that were in fact subject to the laws of state to force other state legislatures to adopt their respective ideas or even abolish the state constitutions. It really is a complete contradiction that would show our nation to be a nation of checks and balances, but it’s also pretty clear that the federal state is no less an institution and is not a rule of political checks and balances. There was no requirement that states and local governments be governed independently from each other and was an act of Congress that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution or with any of the other constitutions in the United States. What you do to your neighbors is exactly the opposite of what you should do
States over the years have argued over state government and the federal government and the Article of Confederation was a perfect example how the state government does not work. In Document D Maryland questions the authority of the federal government to incorporate a bank. During the McCulloch v. Maryland case Maryland attempted to tax the bank. Maryland got overruled and didnt get their way. Still it serves as a good example of sectionalism where states are thinking only for themselves and not for the good of the nation. Thomas Jefferson in Document F also claimed that the Missouri Compromise will be divide the United States and obliterate unity. This claim is true considering now that the North and South now compete for more free and slave states. In order for Missouri to become a slave state Maine had to become independent again showing signs of sectionalism the North vs. the South. Signs of nationalism although are seen in Document H. John Q. Adams wrote in his diary about the Monroe Doctrine which warns the Holy Alliance to stay out of the Caribbean and Americas claiming they were the defenders of democracy. The United States did not have the army to back up this bold statement but it was still a bold sign of nationalism and did this for the purpose of controlling commerce in this region and improving the state of the economy.
In fact during this time the economy was not at its greatest. The Panic of 1819 was an economic depression caused by over speculation in the western lands. The National Bank of the United States foreclosed on the loans and many people lost their land and debtors went to jail. The Western Expansion can be seed in Document E where the west is being slowly populated. Most areas do not have a high population density at all proving that this indeed was not an “Era of Good Feelings” considering the fact people and the country was in serious debt. States have also have always been fighting over control of the federal government. The unequal distribution of population decided the amount of representatives sent into congress. The higher the population the higher chances of controlling the government which is another example of sectionalism. John Randolph in Document A complains that the North are benefiting from the tariffs which at the same time has been hurting the South and the South has not been receiving any help whatsoever. Although the tariff was passed for nationalistic purposes to protect American goods and products sectionalism spread when the South began to feel cheated out of this tariff where the North made more money and the South was to remain poor. No signs of “Good Feelings” were present but instead conflicts began to rise.
Undoubtedly, the “Era of Good Feelings” had its social effects in the nation.Document C shows unity and nationalism in the country where everyone celebrates Independence Day together and happily. On the contrary, although they may be celebrating