Connexus 8: History Unit 5 > Lesson 6: Monroe's Presidency > Flashcards
Lesson 6: Monroe's Presidency Flashcards
Adams-Onís Treaty Definition
an 1821 treaty between Spain and the United States in which Spain agreed to sell Florida to the United States
American System Definition
a program for economic growth promoted by Henry Clay in the early 1800s that called for high tariffs on imports
Daniel Webster Definition
a Massachusetts Senator who opposed slavery and supported the Compromise of 1850
Gibbons v. Ogden Definition
an 1824 case in which the Supreme Court upheld the power of the federal government to regulate commerce
Henry Clay Definition
a leading member of the House of Representatives for Kentucky under Presidents Madison and Monroe who spoke for the interests of the West, and who later served as a U.S. senator and Secretary of State
Internal Improvements Definition
the addition of new roads, bridges, and canals, or the improvement of existing routes
Interstate Commerce Definition
business that crosses state lines
Intervention Definition
interference in the affairs of another
James Monroe Definition
the fifth president of the United States and the creator of the Monroe Doctrine
John C. Calhoun Definition
a leading member of the House of Representatives for South Carolina under Presidents Madison and Monroe who spoke for the interests of the South, and who later served as Vice President and U.S. senator
McCulloch v. Maryland Definition
an 1819 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government’s powers could be extended by the “necessary and proper” clause and that states had no right to interfere with federal institutions within their borders
Monroe Doctrine Definition
President Monroe’s foreign policy statement warning European nations not to interfere in Latin America
Negro Fort Definition
a settlement of African Americans who had escaped slavery in the Spanish colony of Florida
Republic of Great Columbia Definition
an independent state composed of the present-day nations of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Panama; established in 1819
Sectionalism Definition
loyalty to a state or section rather than to the whole country
United Provinces of Central America Definition
a federation established in 1823 that contained the present-day nations of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica
Who was the last Revolutionary War president? How did he act? What was his character?
Monroe was the last Revolutionary War officer to become President. He was almost 60 years old when he took office, and he had old-fashioned manners. Americans were fond of his old-fashioned ways. In 1817, he made a goodwill tour of the country. In Boston, crowds cheered Monroe enthusiastically. Boston newspapers expressed surprise at this warm welcome for a Democratic Republican from Virginia. After all, Boston had long been a Federalist stronghold.
What did Monroe want to do for the nation? What was the Era of Good Feelings? What did Monroe’s second election signify? What is sectionalism? What caused it?
Monroe hoped to create a new sense of national unity. One newspaper wrote that the United States was entering an “era of good feelings.” By the time Monroe ran for a second term in 1820, no candidate opposed him. The Federalist party had disappeared. While conflict between political parties declined, disputes between different sections of the nation sharpened. These disputes were a result of sectionalism, or loyalty to one’s state or section rather than to the nation as a whole. In Congress, three ambitious young men took center stage in these disputes. All three would play key roles in Congress for more than 30 years, as well as serving in other offices. Each represented a different section of the country, and each had unique leadership qualities.
What did John C. Calhoun speak out against for the South?
John C. Calhoun spoke for the South. He had grown up on a frontier farm in South Carolina. Calhoun’s immense energy and striking features earned him the nickname “young Hercules.” He was slim and handsome, with deep-set eyes and a high forehead. His way of speaking was so intense that it sometimes made people uncomfortable to be in his presence. Calhoun had supported the War of 1812. Like many southerners, he was a firm defender of slavery. In general, he opposed policies that would strengthen the power of the federal government.
What did Daniel Webster speak out against for the North?
Daniel Webster of New Hampshire was perhaps the most skillful public speaker of his time. With eyes flashing and shoulders thrown back, Webster was an impressive sight when he stood up to speak in Congress. An observer described him as a “great cannon loaded to the lips.” Like many New Englanders, Webster had opposed the War of 1812. He even refused to vote for taxes to pay for the war effort. After the war, he wanted the federal government to take a larger role in building the nation’s economy. Unlike Calhoun, Webster thought that slavery was evil.
What did Henry Clay speak out against for the West?
Henry Clay spoke for the West. You have already met Clay as a leader of the War Hawks, who pushed for war against Britain in 1812. Clay was born in Virginia but moved to Kentucky when he was 20. As a young lawyer, he was once fined for brawling with an opponent. Usually, however, he charmed both friends and rivals. Supporters called him “Gallant Harry of the West.” Like Webster, Clay strongly favored a more active role for the central government in promoting the country’s growth.
After the War of 1812, what economic problem did the National Bank cause?
After the War of 1812, leaders such as Calhoun, Webster, and Clay had to deal with serious economic issues. Despite the nation’s great physical growth and the soaring spirits of its people, the United States economy faced severe problems. This was due in part to the lack of a national bank. The charter that had set up the first Bank of the United States ran out in 1811. Without the Bank to lend money and regulate the nation’s money supply, the economy suffered. State banks made loans and issued money. However, they often put too much money into circulation. With so much money available to spend, prices rose rapidly. In the nation’s early years, Democratic Republicans such as Jefferson and Madison had opposed a national bank because they saw it as unconstitutional. They thought that the Constitution did not give the federal government the right to charter corporations, such as a national bank. By 1816, however, many Democratic Republicans believed that a bank was needed. They supported a law to charter the second Bank of the United States. By lending money and restoring order to the nation’s money supply, the Bank helped American businesses grow.
After the War of 1812, what economic problem developed due to foreign competition?
Another economic problem facing the nation was foreign competition, especially from Britain. In the early 1800s, the Embargo Act and then the War of 1812 kept most British goods out of the United States. In response, ambitious American business leaders such as Francis Cabot Lowell established their own mills and factories. As a result, American industry grew quickly until 1815.
What were domestic problems caused by foreign goods, especially from Britain?
With the end of the War of 1812, British goods again poured into the United States. Because the British had a head start in industrializing, they could make and sell goods more cheaply than Americans could. Most British factory buildings and machines were older and had already been paid for. In contrast, Americans still had to pay for their new factory buildings. Sometimes, British manufacturers sold cloth in the United States for less than it cost to make so that they could capture the market. British manufacturers hoped to put American rivals out of business. Then, the British planned to raise prices.
What was the impact of the Tariff of 1816? Why was it made?
This British strategy caused dozens of New England businesses to fail. Angry owners asked Congress to place a protective tariff on all goods imported from Europe. As you have read, the purpose of a protective tariff is to protect a country’s industries from foreign competition.
Congress responded by passing the Tariff of 1816. It greatly raised tariffs on imports. This increase made imported goods far more expensive than similar American-made goods. The Tariff of 1816 impacted the North, West, and South differently because each region had a different economy. The North was the base of America’s manufacturing. It therefore benefited the most. Higher prices on foreign goods made American goods more competitive. American factories sold more products, and businesses grew. The economies of the South and West relied heavily on farming. They were not as financially invested in manufacturing and therefore did not experience the same benefits as the North. Goods like cloth and iron became more expensive to southern and western consumers. Northerners gained income as a result. Higher tariffs led to angry protests. Lacking factories, southerners did not benefit from the tariff. Also, southerners bought many British goods. The new tariff drove up the price of British-made goods. Southerners complained that the tariff made northern manufacturers rich at the expense of the South.
What did the bitter disputes over tariffs contribute to?
The bitter dispute over tariffs contributed to the growth of sectionalism. Americans identified themselves as southerners, northerners, or westerners. In Congress, representatives from different sections often clashed.
After seeing the growth of sectionalism over tariffs, what did Henry Clay propose?
Henry Clay wanted to promote economic growth for all sections. His program, known as the American System, called for high tariffs on imports, which would help northern factories. With wealth from industry, Clay believed, northerners would have the money to buy farm products from the West and the South. High tariffs would also reduce American dependence on foreign goods.
Clay also urged Congress to use money from tariffs to build roads, bridges, and canals. A better transportation system, he believed, would make it easier and cheaper for farmers in the West and the South to ship goods to city markets.
What were the views on Henry Clay’s American System?
Clay’s American System never fully went into effect. While tariffs remained high, Congress spent little on internal improvements—new roads, bridges, and canals. Southerners in particular disliked Clay’s plan. The South had many fine rivers on which to transport goods. Many southerners opposed paying for roads and canals that brought them no direct benefits. Some Americans also thought Clay’s plan for developing transportation with federal support was unconstitutional. They did not believe the federal government had the authority to build such projects. They believed that by regulating industry and building roads and canals, the federal government would gain too much power.
Under Chief Justice John Marshall, how did the Supreme Court strengthen the power of the federal government?
Under Chief Justice John Marshall, the Supreme Court strengthened the power of the federal government. The Court gave the federal government the power to regulate the economy.
Why was the case of McColloch v. Maryland influential? What caused this case? What was its results?
After Congress chartered the second Bank of the United States, Maryland tried to tax the Bank in order to drive it out of the state. James McCulloch, the Bank cashier, refused to pay the tax. In the case of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the Court ruled that states had no right to interfere with federal institutions within their borders. The ruling strengthened federal power. It also allowed the Bank of the United States to continue, which helped the economy to expand. The Court decision addressed the issue of the meaning of the “necessary and proper” clause of the U.S. Constitution. It ruled that the federal government had the power to charter the Bank of the United States under the clause. This clause states that “The Congress shall have Power … To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” for carrying out functions outlined elsewhere in the Constitution. Since the Constitution gave the federal government the power to tax and borrow money and to regulate business, the Court stated that creating a bank could be considered “necessary and proper” to carrying out these powers. The Supreme Court took a “loose constructionist” view of the Constitution, believing that the “necessary and proper” clause should be interpreted loosely as circumstances changed. Many Americans disagreed with the Court. Those who disagreed took a “strict constructionist” view that the “necessary and proper” clause permitted only actions absolutely necessary for performing the government’s constitutional duties. Strict constructionists generally agreed that the Bank of the United States was not truly necessary for the government to function.
What was the result of Gibbons v. Ogden? What was its impact?
In another case, Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), the Supreme Court upheld the power of the federal government to regulate trade between states. The Court struck down a New York law that tried to control steamboat travel between New York and New Jersey. The Court ruled that a state could regulate trade only within its own borders. Only the federal government had the power to regulate interstate commerce, or trade between different states. This decision helped the national economy by making it easier for the government to regulate trade. These rulings not only affected the government. They also changed daily life for people in the United States. The New York law had given a monopoly, or exclusive rights, to Robert Fulton’s steamboat company to run ferries to New Jersey. Fulton’s company was the only one allowed to run ferries between the two states. When the Supreme Court struck down this New York law, Fulton’s monopoly on steamboat traffic ended. As a result, his company could not compete with companies that charged a lower fare, and people working for Fulton lost their jobs. However, the increased competition was good for consumers because it led to lower fares. Many people also liked this ruling because it created a single national market for goods and services, regulated by the federal government. Having clear national laws to follow made it easier for people to do business and move goods and services nationwide.
By 1810, why did many people in Spain’s colonies in the Americas want independence?
By 1810, many people in Spain’s colonies in the Americas were eager for independence. They had many reasons to be unhappy. Most people, even wealthy creoles, had little or no say in government. In Latin America, the term creole described people born to Spanish parents there. They demanded a role in government. Opposition to Spain was also growing among Native Americans. Harsh rules kept Native Americans forever in debt. All over Latin America, people were eager to be free of the Spanish.
How did Mexico win Independence from Spain?
A Mexican priest named Miguel Hidalgo (mee GEL ee DAHL goh) called on Mexicans to fight for independence from Spain in 1810. Many Mexicans answered his call. Rebel forces won control of several provinces before Father Hidalgo was captured. In 1811, Hidalgo was executed. Another priest, José Morelos (hoh SAY moh RAY lohs), took up the fight. Because he called for a program to give land to peasants, wealthy creoles opposed him. Before long, Morelos, too, was captured and killed by the Spanish. Slowly, though, creoles began to join the revolutionary movement. In 1821, revolutionary forces led by creoles won control of Mexico. A few years later, Mexico became a republic with its own constitution.
What was Simón Bolívar’s influence on the independence of South American nations?
In South America, too, a series of revolutions freed colonies from Spanish rule. The best-known revolutionary leader was Simón Bolívar (see MOHN boh LEE vahr). He became known as the Liberator for his role in the Latin American wars of independence. Bolívar came from a wealthy creole family in Venezuela. As a young man, he took up the cause of Venezuelan independence. Bolívar promised, “I will never allow my hands to be idle, nor my soul to rest until I have broken the shackles which chain us to Spain.” Bolívar rose to become a leader of the rebel forces. In a bold move, he led an army from Venezuela over the high Andes Mountains into Colombia. There, Bolívar took the Spanish forces by surprise and defeated them in 1819. Soon after, Bolívar became president of the independent Republic of Great Colombia. It included the present-day nations of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Panama.
What was José de San Martí’s influence on the Independence of Argentina, Chile, and Peru? What was the United Provinces of Central America? How many colonies did Spain have by 1825? It what manner did Brazil win independence from Portugal?
Other independent nations emerged in Latin America. José de San Martín (sahn mahr TEEN) led Argentina to freedom in 1816. He then helped the people of Chile and Peru win independence. In 1821, the peoples of Central America declared independence from Spain. Two years later, they formed the United Provinces of Central America. It included the present-day nations of Nicaragua, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. By 1825, Spain had lost all its colonies in Latin America except Puerto Rico and Cuba. The Portuguese colony of Brazil won independence peacefully. When Brazilian revolutionaries demanded independence, Prince Pedro, son of the Portuguese king, joined their cause. He became emperor of the new independent nation of Brazil in 1822.
How did America influence Latin American Republics? Why did Latin American republics develop differently than in America?
Spain’s former colonies modeled their constitutions on that of the United States. Yet, their experience after independence was very different from that of their neighbor to the north. Unlike the people of the 13 British colonies, the peoples of Latin America did not unite into a single country. In part, geography made unity difficult. Latin America covered a much larger area than the British colonies. Thick rain forests and mountains such as the high, rugged Andes acted as barriers to travel and communication. Also, the Spanish colonies were spread out over a huge area. Therefore, several separate republics formed. The new republics had a hard time setting up stable governments. Under Spanish rule, the colonists had gained little or no experience in self-government. Powerful leaders took advantage of the turmoil to seize control. As a result, the new nations were often unable to achieve democratic rule.
Why did people want Florida from the Spanish?
Spain lost another one of its colonies, Florida—not to independence, but to the United States. Many Americans wanted to gain possession of Florida. White southerners were especially worried about disturbances across the border. Creeks and Seminoles in Florida sometimes raided settlements in Georgia. Also, Florida was a refuge for many Africans and African Americans who escaped slavery.
Why did Andrew Jackson invade the Negro Fort in Spanish Florida?
Since the 1700s, Spanish officials had protected enslaved Africans who had fled from plantations in Georgia and South Carolina. Seminoles allowed Africans to live near their villages. In return, these “black Seminoles” gave the Seminoles a share of the crops they raised. The black Seminoles adopted many Seminole customs. One settlement on the Apalachicola River known as the Negro Fort contained about 1,000 black Seminoles. General Andrew Jackson demanded that Spain demolish the Negro Fort. When the Spanish governor refused, the United States invaded Florida and destroyed the fort.
What did the Adams-Onís Treaty state?
In 1818, Jackson again headed to Florida with a force of more than 3,000 soldiers. Spain protested but did little else. It was busy fighting rebels in Latin America and could not risk war with the United States.
In the end, Spain agreed to peace talks. Secretary of State John Quincy Adams worked out a treaty with Spain’s foreign minister, Luis de Onís (LOO ess day oh NEES). In it, Spain agreed to give Florida to the United States in exchange for $5 million. The Adams-Onís Treaty took effect in 1821.
What did the Monroe Doctrine state? What was its influence?
Americans cheered as Latin American nations won independence. The actions of European powers, however, worried Secretary of State Adams and President Monroe. In 1815, Prussia, France, Russia, and Austria formed an alliance aimed at crushing any revolution that sprang up in Europe. They seemed ready to help Spain regain its colonies in Latin America. In addition, Russia claimed lands on the Pacific coast of North America. The British, too, worried about other European nations meddling in the Western Hemisphere. They feared that their profitable trade with the newly independent countries would be hurt if Spain regained control of its former colonies. Thus, they suggested that the United States and Britain issue a joint statement guaranteeing the freedom of the new nations of Latin America. Monroe decided to act independently of Britain. In a message to Congress in 1823, he made a bold foreign policy statement, known as the Monroe Doctrine. Monroe declared that the United States would not interfere in the affairs of European nations or existing colonies of the European nations. At the same time, he warned European nations not to attempt to regain control of the newly independent nations of Latin America. The Monroe Doctrine stated that the United States would oppose any attempt to reclaim old colonies or build new colonies in the Americas. Monroe’s message showed that the United States was determined to keep European powers out of the Western Hemisphere. The United States did not have the military power to enforce the Monroe Doctrine. Britain, however, supported the statement. With its strong navy, it could stop Europeans from building new colonies in the Americas.
What were some more modern uses of the Monroe Doctrine?
As the United States became stronger, the Monroe Doctrine grew in importance. On several occasions, the United States successfully challenged European intervention, or direct involvement, in Latin America. In the 1900s, Presidents also used the Monroe Doctrine to justify sending troops to Caribbean nations. Thus, Monroe’s bold statement helped shape United States foreign policy for more than 100 years.
