Historical Perspective - The Worst American President


Many historians think the worst President in American history was James Buchanan. A Democrat, he served immediately prior to Abraham Lincoln for one term, from 1857-1861.

President Buchanan served at a difficult time in American history. Chief Justice Roger Taney lobbed a controversial political grenade at the outset of Buchanan’s term, on March 6, 1857, with the infamous Dred Scott decision. The opinion declared that slaves were not citizens of the United States, could not sue in Federal courts, and therefore the property rights of slave-owners were protected from interference by Congress. The delicate balance between slaveholding and non-slave states was threatened by the incorporation of Western Territories into statehood, particularly Kansas, which saw bitter political and sometimes violent fights over the legal status of slavery. Tensions in the country were so taught that the Whig party, which became a national force in the 1830s through its opposition to the states’ rights and rural-leaning President Andrew Jackson’s Democrats, completely dissolved.

In the midst of this turmoil, President Buchanan displayed little capacity to ease tensions. In his inaugural address he called the territorial issue of slavery, such as in Kansas, “happily, a matter of but little practical importance.” Much of his incapacity arose from the states’ rights ideology of his party. “As sovereign States, they, and they alone, are responsible before God and the world for the slavery existing among them. For this the people of the North are not more responsible and have no more right to interfere than with similar institutions in Russia or in Brazil.” Moreover, “[i]t is beyond the power of any president, no matter what may be his own political proclivities, to restore peace and harmony among the states.” At his last State of the Union, he effectively told Congress that secession was not legal, but that the federal government had no power to stop it.[1]

And yet, despite these laisse faire quotes with respect to the capacity of Northern states and the federal government to interfere in Southern state affairs, President Buchanan’s administration did use federal power to tip the balance in favor of secession. His War Secretary, John B. Floyd, transferred weapons from northern to southern arsenals as tensions rose. The first shipment of 115,000 rifles occurred in 1859. Another 10,000 were sent to South Carolina, the site of opening salvos for the Civil War, in fall 1860, followed by 113 heavy canon transferred out of Pittsburg in December. Although cleared of wrongdoing by a subsequent House committee, Floyd’s armaments transfers were, at best, ill-considered. He went on to become a mediocre general in the Confederate Army.[2]

John B. Floyd’s Southern bias was not accidental. According to Michael Todd Landis, Buchanan’s inaugural Cabinet “consisted of four Southerners, one elderly Northern statesman quite agreeable to Southerners, and two additional Northern men who were considered doughfaces. In the end, Buchanan’s cabinet did not even represent a range of interests and opinions within the Democratic party, much less the nation.”[3] Several cabinet members, in addition to Floyd, became Confederate leaders.

President Buchanan was not completely ineffective. He had previous political experience in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and as Minister to Russia, Secretary of State, and Ambassador to the UK. He knew how to lead and be effective. For example, he successfully quelled insurrectionist Mormon settlers during the Utah War, an action in some tension with his stated ideology vis-à-vis states and slavery. However, when it came to the most important question of his time, President Buchanan failed spectacularly, failing to forge any political solutions and, even worse, aiding the South in its secessionist efforts.

[1] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29501
[2] https://www.americanheritage.com/content/was-secretary-war-traitor
[3] https://journalofthecivilwarera.org/tag/james-buchanan/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Plumber's View - Voting Intermediated Shares

Image
Introduction “The existing system of shareholder voting is crude, imprecise, and fragile. Gil Sparks, a leading Delaware lawyer, estimates that, in a contest that is closer than 55 to 45%, there is no verifiable answer to the question ‘who won?’” [1] That system, explicated by Kahan and Rock in 2008, is largely the same system employed today. This post updates the seminal work of Kahan and Rock, from whom the quote came, by (1) briefly reviewing how shareholder voting in the United States is crude, imprecise, and fragile, [2] (2) comparing the U.S. system to other shareholder voting systems around the world to highlight practices that are more precise and robust, (3) discussing technology that can increase the certainty and validity of shareholder votes, and (4) suggesting regulatory reforms that might alleviate some voting problems. U.S. Proxy Voting This section reviews how shareholder voting in the United States is dysfunctional. It starts by presenting background...
Read more

Planned Misery

I want to briefly address what Professor Susan Marks, of the London School of Economics, calls ‘planned misery’. [1] In her writing, planned misery “denotes misery that belongs with the logic of particular socio-economic arrangements.” [2] To me, this definition invites reflection about how global capitalism is structured such that human, labor and environmental rights abuses perpetrated in developing countries in industries like mining, textiles, and electronics seem unavoidable. There is a very positive side to globalization over the past 30 years. Namely, the combination of increased foreign investor protections and lower trade barriers have increased the flow of capital to poor countries, redistributing industrial resources from rich countries to the global poor, and increasing standards of living throughout the developing world. The quintessential contemporary model for this story is China but there are many other examples. For instance, China’s economic miracle might be put ...
Read more

Corporate Governance Overview - Current Issues

Introduction This post provides a summary report on a collection of public company corporate governance topics, including the historical development of the issues, the positions adopted by major institutional investors and proxy advisory firms, and the current state of corporate America with respect to the topics covered. Corporate governance refers to a panoply of issues, generally focused on the board of directors. A corporate board is the governing body for the company. The board sets corporate policy as well as, among other things, oversees company executives, decides executive pay, and assesses major transactions. In carrying out its role, a board must act in accordance with federal law, state law where the company is incorporated, and the corporate charter and bylaws. Additionally, board members are held to fiduciary duties like loyalty and care, which ensure that board members do not have conflicts of interest and act in an informed manner. Within these constraints, ho...
Read more