Presidents Madison and Monroe

and the Party Press in Transition,

1808-1824

by

David R. Davies

Graduate Student, University of Alabama

2803 Williamsburg Road

Hattiesburg, MS 39402



































































Submitted to the 1994 paper competition

of the American Journalism Historians Association







Presidents Madison and Monroe

and the Party Press in Transition,

1808-1824


 



The presidential administrations of James Madison and James Monroe mark a distinctive transition period within the party press era. The rabidly partisan newspapers of 1808 had changed markedly by 1824.

Before and during the War of 1812, the party press was as partisan and mean-spirited as ever. But when the Federalist Party lost national influence following the war, the party press was left with only one party to rally around, the Democratic-Republicans. The brief "Era of Good Feelings" of the early Monroe years softened the vituperative edge of the party press, though editors continued to do battle on behalf of preferred politicians and sectional interests.

Newspapers that had divided along party lines in 1808 had realigned by 1824 behind the various Democratic-Republican candidates to succeed Monroe. The stage was now set for the re-emergence of political parties in the age of Jackson, when newspapers once again lined up by party. The Madison and Monroe years had proven to be a distinctive era of change for the party press, a little-understood transition period in an era that itself has been largely misunderstood.

Yet this middle transition period of the party press has been largely unnoticed because the press in the Madison and Monroe administrations has been seldom studied by journalism historians. The party press era is usually discussed only in terms of the early national period -- the Adams and Jefferson administrations in particular -- and the age of Jackson, if that era is broadly defined as beginning with Jackson's first run for the presidency in the contentious presidential election of 1824.(1) The party press period is incorrectly regarded as a static era in which party organs battled each other in vituperative political attacks throughout the period.

Until recently, journalism historians have tended to denigrate the party press for its party ties and to make irrelevant comparisons with the advertising-driven, independent press that followed. Veteran journalist Frederic Hudson, writing in 1873, derided the party press as "bound to party" and set the tone for much of the critical historiography that followed.(2) Hudson and succeeding generations of historians, most notably Frank Luther Mott, dismissed the party press out of hand. To Mott, the party press marked "the dark ages of American journalism." Editors in this period, Mott believed, were vituperative individuals who sold out the public good for party interests and who engaged in vicious attacks against one other.(3)

More recently, historians have begun to analyze the party press on its own terms, arguing that it is illogical to evaluate newspapers of the early Nineteenth Century in terms of how they compared with the independent journalism that developed later.(4) Nonetheless, this recent perspective has not been applied vigorously to the newspapers in the Madison and Monroe administrations -- the middle, transition years of the party press.

Madison and Monroe

and the administration organ:

the National Intelligencer

In one way at least, the party press changed little during the middle years: Presidents Madison and Monroe each continued to use one newspaper as a party organ of the Democratic-Republicans, and that newspaper was the National Intelligencer. The Intelligencer explained the administration's positions and traded barbs with the opposition Federalist press.

This was to be expected in the party press era, when most newspapers were supported by political parties, either by direct subsidies or government printing contracts. Newspapers existed to move the party faithful and win converts, not necessarily to provide a summary of the day's events. Party support was crucial to most newspapers' survival, given that advertising provided relatively little income in this pre-industrial age. Newspapers were usually a direct arm of either the Federalist party, which elected John Adams in 1796, or the Republican party of Thomas Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe.

The National Intelligencer was no different. Since its founding in 1800 by Samuel Harrison Smith, the Intelligencer had served as the administration organ for Thomas Jefferson. It was only natural, then, that Jefferson's fellow Republicans, Madison and Monroe, continued to rely upon the Intelligencer as presidential organ among the nation's newspapers.(5)

The beginning of Madison's presidency coincided roughly with the beginning of new leadership at the Intelligencer. Joseph Gales, Jr., son of the Republican editor Joseph Gales, Sr., of the Raleigh Register, had begun an apprenticeship at the newspaper in 1807 and bought the paper effective August 31, 1810. Gales and William Winston Seaton, who became a partner in the enterprise beginning in 1812, jointly operated the newspaper, which remained the administrative organ until 1824.

Gales declared his Republican principles from the time he took over the Intelligencer in 1810, but he wrote in his diary that he was under no restrictions "to pursue any line of conduct toward the Public or towards the Administration." Gales did not think that Madison, who was on his annual visit to the Virginia countryside that August, was even consulted on the changing of the guard at the newspaper.(6)

In his first month as editor, Gales met with Secretary of State Robert Smith several times to acquaint himself with the administration. On one visit, Gales asked whether he should make a statement about the delicate negotiations over France's trade restrictions against the United States. The controversial negotiations had already caused Republican and Federalist papers to abuse each other roundly, but Smith stressed the official character of the National Intelligencer and told Gales to wait. As Gales remembered it, Smith "beat a good deal around the bush; his object was to convince me that I should not make any comments at all, but be a mere pliant instrument."(7)

Finally, on October 17, 1810, Gales summoned the courage to visit Madison. He was so nervous he passed Madison's door several times before he could acquire the courage to ring the doorbell. He found Madison difficult to talk to, with "an air of severity about him which is anything but encouraging." Gales consoled himself that he had to visit Madison. "I performed a duty to myself and my establishment in visiting him," he wrote in his diary.(8) Similarly, duty forced Gales to attend a social gathering with the president and his cabinet the next week.(9)

After several false starts, Gales began to earn the administration's trust. By the spring of 1812, the National Intelligencer was so in tune with the administration that one scholar has commented that it was often difficult to tell who was writing the editorials.(10) The administration laid out its position by sending frequent directives to the Intelligencer office on what the newspaper should publish.(11) Madison's cabinet members, including Monroe, sometimes wrote unsigned articles for the National Intelligencer themselves.(12)

Monroe, upon becoming president, kept the same relationship with the National Intelligencer during his administration as had Madison and Jefferson. John Quincy Adams' diary notes that Gales and Seaton sometimes asked the administration about issues. Adams said that material was sent to the newspaper from time to time for publication and that Gales sometimes visited Monroe to inquire about particular articles.(13)

After the War of 1812 began, Gales and Seaton not only took up for the Republican position, but they also ridiculed Federalist editors for opposing the war, saying, "This is the season for bravado."(14) Gales and Seaton dismissed as a "nest of reptiles" the delegates to the Hartford Convention, the meeting of New England Federalists that drafted a set of grievances against the federal government.(15)

When British Admiral George Cockburn burned Washington in 1814, he targeted government buildings and also burned the National Intelligencer office "under the bare-faced pretext that it was a governmental office," the senior Gales recalled. "Cockburn, however repeatedly said it was because the Editors took so decided a part in favor of America against Great Britain."(16)

The National Intelligencer not only represented the administration's viewpoint but disseminated that view to other Republican newspapers, which often reprinted Intelligencer accounts. The newspaper's Washington news was exhaustive;

Gales and Seaton both knew shorthand and covered the Congressional debates at length. Newspapers across the country praised the newspaper, as did the Baltimore Federal Republican in 1821, for "the personal exertions of the editors" in covering Congress.(17)

If Gales and Seaton were honored for their reporting skills, they were sometimes derided as administration mouthpieces, particularly by opposition newspapers. The Cincinnati Literary Cadet nicknamed the Intelligencer the "court paper." The National Advocate of New York said that Gales and Seaton took their cue "from somebody or other in Washington," which prompted the two editors to defend their independence. "We stretch our views abroad over the nation, speak truly what we think its interest dictates, support the measures which appear to us to contribute to it, and oppose those which appear to be opposed to it."(18)

The Intelligencer had common cause with the many other Republican prints. A close ally among the Republican editors was Joseph Gales, Sr., of the Raleigh Register. Gales, Sr., had urged in 1808 that "every man who values his freedom and independence" should vote for Madison. Otherwise, the Republican administration would be overturned and the country would return to pre-1800 conditions such as excise and stamp taxes.(19) On the eve of Madison's inauguration, the Register opined that the newspaper was "disposed to look up to him for everything great and good."(20)

Gales, Sr., had been known to flaunt his politics even in the obituary column, in which he would sometimes comment in passing on the deceased's political affiliation. The departed, it would be noted, was "a firm and fixed Republican."(21)

The elder Gales endorsed the president's war message in the War of 1812 and offered prayers for a "vigorous prosecution and successful termination."(22) During the war, Gales said often that the Federalists' antiwar attitude amounted to treason, and he characterized Harrison Gray Otis, leader of the Federalists, as a traitor and submissionist.(23)

Madison, the Federalist Press,

and the War of 1812

While the National Intelligencer and other Republican papers could be counted on to defend the administration, the Federalist press could be counted on to attack it. Before and during the War of 1812, Federalist attacks on Madison were vehement and relentless.

A leading Federalist paper was the Columbian Centinel, described by Joseph T. Buckingham, editor of the Boston Courier, as "an indispensable source of news for the country printers." The Centinel was "every where known and every where read," according to Buckingham.(24) Centinel editor Benjamin Russell, like other Northeastern Federalist editors, abhorred the War of 1812. He announced the beginning of the war in critical terms: "The awful event so often anticipated by us as the inevitable effect of the infatuated policy of the Rulers of the American People has now been realized, -- and the worst of measures has emerged from its secret womb in the worst of forms." Russell criticized the administration throughout the conflict, which he called "an unnecessary and unjust war."(25)

At one point, the Centinel even went so far as to support withdrawal from the union, claiming that little was left of the country anyway after a series of defeats at the hands of the British.(26)

After the Baltimore Federal Republican greeted the beginning of the war with the opinion that Madison was a pawn of Napoleon, enraged citizens smashed the printing office and tore down the building. The National Intelligencer seemed satisfied at the attack on its rival, announcing that citizens had been "very peaceably engaged for two or three hours in demolishing the office."(27)

The Federal Republican moved its presses to Georgetown but kept up the attacks on Madison, describing him as Napoleon's "humble imitator and submissive satellite." The newspaper believed that the administration's talk of peace was trickery resulting from "Mr. Madison's character for cunning and his habitual deceit and hypocrisy."(28)

The Federal Republican excoriated Madison for announcing that sealed mail to England or to British commanders would be examined before delivery. "By a most profligate and daring set of usurpations and tyranny, James Madison, after the manner of his master, Napoleon of France, has lately laid violent hands on the public mail, and broke open indiscriminately the letters of citizens and foreigners." Madison would soon open domestic mail as well, the newspaper predicted.(29)

The Federalist prints even doubted the sanity of the president and spoke wistfully of his possible death. When Madison fell ill in late summer 1813, the Federal Republican was almost gleeful. The newspaper said that the president appeared to have only a few days to live and added that "not a few, who have recently visited him, have left his chamber under a full conviction of the derangement of his mind."(30) After Vice President Elbridge Gerry died on November 23, 1814, the Federalist Winchester Gazette said that Madison's party associates "wish he was quietly asleep with the late vice president."(31)

When Cockburn burned Washington in 1814, he repeated the "coarse jests and vulgar slang of the Federal Republican respecting the chief magistrate," the National Intelligencer reported.(32)

Another persistent critic of Madison was the New York Evening Post. William Coleman, editor of the journal, harshly criticized the president's management of the war. "If there be judgment in this people, they will see the utter unfitness of our rulers for anything beyond management, intrigue, and electioneering," Coleman wrote. After American troops surrendered to the British at Detroit, Coleman was incensed. "Miserably deficient in practical talent must be the administration which formed the plan of that invasion," Coleman declared.(33)

When Madison proposed raising revenue with internal taxes, the Evening Post was aghast. "`Is this a dagger I see before me?' The petrified and amazed Macbeth felt hardly less horror at the appearance of the bloody dagger staring him in the face, than must the good people of these United States at beholding a democratic President recommending internal taxes." The Post noted that Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin was out of the country when questions were raised about the taxes. "Fled from his station, like a coward, as he is, fled to hide himself from the evil in a distant land."(34) In fact, Gallatin was on a peace mission.

The Federalist prints continued to pester Madison even until the end of the war. When a delay in mails kept Washington wondering about the outcome of the Battle of New Orleans, the Federal Republican feared the worst. Recent reports held that General Andrew Jackson was in bad health and short of ammunition, and the newspaper accused Madison of withholding information about the battle. "The only measure for the preservation of the country which is likely to produce any lasting beneficial results, would be the impeachment and punishment of James Madison. While this man, if he deserves the name, is at the head of affairs . . . There can be nothing but dishonor, disappointment and disaster." Madison's heart is "petrified and hard as marble," the newspaper continued. "His body is torpid, and he is without feeling."(35)

Even after Jackson's surprise victory at New Orleans, the Federalist newspapers refused to credit Madison. Coleman wrote that Madison was not "entitled to the least share of the honor attending this brilliant affair, or to partake in the smallest of the glory acquired." The government had not obtained "one single avowed object, for which they involved the country in this bloody and expensive war," the newspaper further declared. "Yet LET THE NATION REJOICE, WE HAVE ESCAPED RUIN."(36)

The Postwar Decline of Federalism

and Monroe's "Era of Good Feelings"

The war, by settling the international tension between Britain and France that had contributed so greatly to the pre-war rivalry between the Federalists and the Republicans, contributed to an increased nationalism that helped the country overcome the extreme political differences before and during the war.(37) Moreover, the Federalists were so discredited by their wartime opposition that they began to fade into the political background. The Federalists' last presidential candidate was Rufus King, who ran against Monroe in 1816. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton declared in his autobiography that the war resulted in "the elevation of the national character throughout the world."(38) Buckingham said that after Monroe's election, the Federalists "became virtually dissolved."(39)

Federalists lost power both because they had opposed the war and because the Democratic-Republicans had appropriated much of their program. After the war, Madison supported harbor defense measures, internal taxation, a protective tariff, higher salaries for public officials, even a new national bank, all tenets of Federalist doctrines that his party had previously opposed. As the Federalist Boston Palladium noted about Madison's supporters in late 1815, "They are now, good souls, heartily in love with a national bank. A lover never sighed half so much for his absent fair-one, as they have within the year for the establishment for a national bank."(40)

Federalists were pleased at this reversal but resentful that their opponents had stolen their program. Coleman of the New York Evening Post was glad at least that the Republicans were "compelled to confess" their errors by making "such an exchange of Jeffersonian policy for federalism."(41) The Federal Republican also was pleased that the Democratic-Republicans had seen the error of their ways. Democracy herself, the newspaper said, had written "with her own hand the world FALSEHOOD on all the charges which she has brought against the federal party."(42)

The Western Monitor of Lexington, Kentucky, complained that the Democratic-Republicans "are now in one breath recommending the measures they formerly abused, and in the next, vilifying the men who taught them these measures. They do not even acknowledge that they have changed their ground."(43) With the Federalists on the defensive, Madison stepped up the removal of his enemies from federal office, a tactic the Evening Post said the president had learned from Jefferson. The newspaper nicknamed the many Federalists who switched parties "Coodies."(44)

The Federalists continued their decline after the election of Monroe, who wrote in 1816 that he believed "the existence of parties is not necessary to free government." The president-elect said he planned to exude goodwill to the Federalists but not to appoint them to federal office.(45) "Our free government, founded on the interest and affectations of the people, has gained, and is daily gaining strength," Monroe said in his first message to Congress in 1817. "Local jealousies are rapidly yielding to more generous, enlarged, and enlightened views of national policy."(46)

In 1817, Monroe undertook a national tour, ostensibly to inspect federal military installations but clearly reminiscent of Washington's national goodwill tour two decades earlier.(47) The response was overwhelming; the same Federalist newspapers that had excoriated Madison now lavished praise on his successor. In fact, it was a leading Federalist editor, Russell, who coined the term the "Era of Good Feelings" to describe the rejuvenated nationalism ushered in my Monroe.(48)

Some Republican prints ridiculed the Federalists for their about-face. Russell dismissed one critic, whom he called a "sour-cider carper," out of hand. "If it has had no other effect than the mere elicitation of these scintillations, it were worth all the pains and expense; as it proves the existence of a raw material where no one ever dreamed of looking for it."(49)

Other Federalists in New England were overjoyed. The Boston Palladium said that previous political enemies had now "shaken hands and become reconciled, and have tacitly agreed to bury all past misunderstanding in oblivion." The Connecticut Mirror said that if Monroe had associated only with New England Democratic-Republicans, "What a pitiful opinion would he form of the character and people of New England."(50)

The National Intelligencer, for its part, welcomed the turnabout among Federalists, particularly in Massachusetts, the hotbed of rebellion during the war. "If, in the present instance, the opposition have become politically virtuous from necessity, this display of virtue will be productive of great good," the newspaper wrote after Monroe's visit to Boston. "It will evince to our southern and western brethren, that republicanism is not extinct in Massachusetts."(51)

The Federalist prints continued to be kind to Monroe after the goodwill tour. At the beginning of the 1818 session of Congress, Russell praised Monroe's address as containing "much interesting and satisfactory intelligence." Of the address, he said "its frankness and total exemption from that diplomatic jargon, which so often mystified other Presidential State Papers, are not among the least of its merits."(52) Buckingham said he did not recall Russell ever passing "a word of censure" upon any acts of the Monroe or John Quincy Adams administrations, "and some of them [were] made the subjects of inflated encomium."(53)

By 1819, even the Federal Republican, which six years before had questioned Madison's sanity, now reveled in the prosperity of his successor's administration. "The nearer the Democratic administration and party come up to the old federal principles and measures, the better they act and the more we prosper -- that is the reason that every body is contented with President Monroe's administration, which is in system and effect strictly federal."(54)

Clearly, party feeling had abated in the early Monroe years, and the party press had lost much of its nasty edge, particularly when compared to the scornful attacks party papers had traded during the War of 1812. But newspapers that had previously fought for parties now realigned behind sectional issues or one of the many candidates to succeed Monroe. A good record of this political jockeying was left by John Quincy Adams, a member of Monroe's cabinet who ultimately won the presidency in 1824.

Adams wrote in 1818, just two years in Monroe's first term, that "[t]here is in the country as great mass of desire to be in opposition to the administration." Adams said the country seemed to believe that Monroe's administration would end "by bringing in an adverse party to it." This possibility "engages all the newspapers not employed by public patronage, but desiring it, and many of those possessing it, against the administration." Adams said newspapers were more even likely to blame the administration as a way of showing their independence and escaping the charge of being subservient to the government.(55)

Adams also wrote that he believed that the administration was on the defensive, with its success depending upon the outcome of issues with Spain and Great Britain. Virginia was "already lukewarm" to the president, Adams believed. "The Richmond Enquirer, which is the voice of Virginia, speaks to him like a master to his slave."(56)

Adams' diary also reveals that Monroe did not always get along with editors, "Era of Good Feelings" notwithstanding. The president was displeased with Thomas Ritchie, editor of the Richmond Enquirer. According to Adams, Monroe called Ritchie "a vain and presumptuous man, affecting to have great influence, and inconsiderately committing himself upon important political subjects without waiting to understand them thoroughly, and thus getting into perplexities without knowing afterwards how to get out of them."(57) Monroe also disliked William Duane of the Philadelphia Aurora, according to Adams, and called him "as unprincipled a fellow as lived."(58)

Monroe also occasionally grew displeased even with editors of the National Intelligencer, according to Adams. When the newspaper published an incorrect article about a cabinet position, Monroe "concluded to send for Gales . . . and have an explanation with him."(59)

By 1824, newspapers were increasingly contentious as jockeying began to succeed Monroe. The candidates included Adams, General Andrew Jackson, John C. Calhoun, and Henry Clay. Adams noted in September 1822 that the National Intelligencer was already leaning toward William H. Crawford, secretary of the treasury, probably because the editors believed Crawford would be successful and they wanted to keep their government printing contracts. Adams believed that newspapers used "principles alike selfish and sordid" in determining whom to support for the presidency. He noted that the Richmond Enquirer supported Crawford "because he is a Virginian and a slaveholder" and assumed that the Democratic Press of Philadelphia had fallen behind Crawford "because I transferred the printing of the laws from that paper to the Franklin [Pennsylvania] Gazette."(60)

"The newspaper war between the presses of Mr. Crawford and Mr. Calhoun waxes warm," Adams wrote the next week, noting that the newspapers in Boston and Washington were trading barbs over the candidates. "If the press is not soon put down, Mr. Crawford has an ordeal to pass through before he reaches the Presidency which will test his merit and pretensions as well as the character of the nation."(61) As the newspaper war intensified the next year, Adams hoped that newspaper readers could see past the partisan motives of editors, "the newspaper scavengers and scape-gibbets, whose republicanism runs in filthy streams from the press."(62)

Conclusion

The press in the Madison and Monroe administrations represented both continuity and subtle change between the early and late periods of the party press era. The continuity was evident in the basic structure of the party press, which, not surprisingly, remained unchanged. Federal government patronage for the press continued to be doled out through this period by the secretary of state, who had authority to contract with newspapers in every state for the publishing of the laws.(63) Newspapers continued to serve as spokesmen for politicians, but the nature of the disputes between newspapers changed, as party lines blurred with the disintegration of the Federalist party on the national scene after the War of 1812 and the election of Monroe. The political sparring that led up to the much-disputed presidential election of 1824 saw a return of newspaper bickering, now tied to specific candidates rather than parties.(64) With the realignment of political parties into Whigs and Democratic-Republicans in the age of Jackson in the late party press period, newspapers were once again divided upon party lines. The party press had now come full circle.

Hezekiah Niles' comment in his Niles Weekly Register about the press in 1825 shows just how little the press had changed from the first party press period to the middle period. Niles said "that nearly every publisher is compelled to take a side in personal electioneering."(65)

1. George Henry Payne, History of Journalism in the United States (New York: Appleton and Co., 1920), covers the Jefferson years, skips Madison's two terms, covers Monroe briefly, then skips over John Quincy Adams' presidency to the Jackson era. Frank Luther Mott's American Journalism: A History, 3d ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1962), for many years the standard undergraduate college text, covers Madison and Monroe but is so negative about the party press as not to be illuminating. Michael Emery and Edwin Emery, The Press and America, 6th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1988) and Wm. David Sloan, James G. Stovall, and James D. Startt, eds., The Media in America, 2d ed., (Scottsdale, Ariz.: Publishing Horizons, Inc., 1993) both touch only briefly on the Madison and Monroe years. A search of the standard bibliographies of journalism history found that very little scholarship has accumulated on the press in the Madison and Monroe administrations. Two exceptions are Robert A. Rutland, "Madison, the Fourth President and the Press," Media History Digest 3 (1983): 21-25, which describes Madison's views on the press but does not touch on his years in the White House, and Harry Ammon, "The Fifth President and the Press," Media History Digest 3 (1983): 22-28.

2. Frederic Hudson, Journalism in the United States from 1690 to 1872 (1873; reprint., New York: Harper and Row, 1969), 142. Though Hudson's account of the party press years are often opinionated, he provides a full, though early, account of the various party newspapers. See p. 141-157.

3. Mott, American Journalism, 168.

4. See William David Sloan, "The Early Party Press: The Newspaper Role in American Politics, 1788-1812," Journalism History 9 (1982): 18-24; William David Sloan, "Scurrility and the Party Press, 1789-1816," American Journalism 5 (1988): 97-112; and Gerald J. Baldasty, "The Press and Politics In the Age of Jackson," Journalism Monographs 89 (1984). William E. Ames and Dwight L. Teeter, "Politics, Economics, and the Mass Media," in Ronald T. Farrar and John D. Stevens, eds., Mass Media and the National Experience (New York: Harper and Row, 1971), 38-63, argue convincingly that early Nineteenth Century newspapers served to help their readers understand the political debate of the day but weren't subject to "that hobgoblin of twentieth century journalism, objectivity. The duty of the administrative organ was to persuade, not to educate." (p. 56)

5. In fact, Madison was one of the Republican leaders Smith had written asking for support in founding the newspaper. See Samuel Harrison Smith to James Madison, 27 August 1800, James Madison Papers, Vol. 21, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; Early history of the National Intelligencer is taken from William E. Ames, A History of the National Intelligencer (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1972). For additional information about Madison and Monroe's views of the press, see James E. Pollard, Presidents and the Press (New York: Macmillan, 1947).

6. National Intelligencer, 31 August 1810; Diary of Joseph Gales, Jr., 1 September 1810, quoted in the National Intelligencer, 30 July 1857. This issue and several other 1857 issues of the Intelligencer reprinted Gales' recollections of the newspaper's early years along with excerpts from his diary.

7. Gales, Jr., diary, 27 September 1810, quoted in the National Intelligencer, 30 July 1857.

8. Gales, Jr., diary, 17 October 1810, quoted in the National Intelligencer, 30 July 1857.

9. Gales, Jr., diary, 24 October 1810, quoted in the National Intelligencer, 30 July 1857.

10. Howard Mahan, "Joseph Gales and the War of 1812," Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1957, 148-156.

11. Monroe to Joseph Gales, Jr., 3 April 1812, Monroe Papers, New York Public Library, New York.

12. Monroe to unnamed correspondent, undated letter, Monroe Papers, Vol. 20, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; Monroe to Joseph Gales, Jr., 21 July 1815, Monroe Papers; Adams' diary, 24 July 1818, quoted in Charles Francis Adams, ed., Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, 12 vols. (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1874-1877), 4:116.

13. 24 July 1818, Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, 4:116.

14. National Intelligencer, 20 January 1814.

15. Ibid., 1 December 1814.

16. Gales' Recollections, pp. 20-21, Winifred and Joseph Gales' Recollections, Gales Family Papers, Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina Library, Chapel Hill, N.C.

17. Baltimore Federal Republican, quoted in the National Intelligencer, 21 November 1821.

18. Cincinnati Literary Cadet, 8 November 1820; National Intelligencer, 17 August 1822.

19. Raleigh Register, 27 October 1808. For history of the Register, see Robert Neal Elliott, The Raleigh Register, 1799-1863 (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1955).

20. Raleigh Register, 2 March 1809.

21. Ibid., 7 January, 14 January 1800.

22. Ibid., 26 June 1812.

23. Ibid., 10 July 1812; 29 January, 16 April, 11 June 1813.

24. Joseph T. Buckingham, Specimens of Newspaper Literature, With Personal Memoirs, Anecdotes, and Reminiscences, 2 vols. (Boston: Redding and Co., 1882), 2:77.

25. Quoted in ibid., 2: 92-94.

26. Columbian Centinel, 10 September 1814.

27. National Intelligencer, 25 June 1812.

28. Federal Republican, 10, 12, 15 March 1813.

29. Ibid., 5 April 1813.

30. Ibid., 13 August 1813.

31. Quoted in ibid., 9 December 1814.

32. National Intelligencer, 30, 31 August 1814.

33. Quoted in Allan Nevins, The Evening Post: A Century of Journalism (New York: Boni and Liverwright, 1922), 55-56.

34. Evening Post, 29 May 1813.

35. Federal Republican, 12, 14 January 1815.

36. Evening Post, 7, 13 February 1815.

37. For background on what Charles M. Wiltse termed the "heady nationalism" of the postwar years, see Wiltse's The New Nation, 1800-1845 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1961), 52-77.

38. Thomas Hart Benton, Thirty Years' View (New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1854), 1:6. A good account of the decline of the Federalists is Shaw Livermore, Jr., The Twilight of Federalism: The Disintegration of the Federalist Party (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1962).

39. Buckingham, Specimens, 2:100.

40. Boston Palladium, 10 November 1815.

41. Evening Post, 23 February 1815.

42. Federal Republican, 3 January 1817.

43. Quoted in the Boston Palladium, 10 May 1816.

44. Evening Post, 12 April, 20 August 1816.

45. Monroe to Andrew Jackson, 14 December 1816, Writings of James Monroe, S.M. Hamilton, ed. (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1898-1903), 5:342-348. Hereafter cited as Monroe writings.

46. Quoted in S. Putnam Waldo, The tour of James Monroe, president of the United States, through the northern and eastern states, in 1817 (Hartford, Conn.: F.D. Bolles, 1818), 273.

47. For background on Monroe's tour, see Harry Ammon, "James Monroe and the Era of Good Feelings," Virginia Magazine 66 (1958): 390-391.

48. Columbian Centinel, 12 July 1817; One historian who has done extensive research in this era notes that he has run across no other use of the phrase before Russell used it in the Centinel. See James Schouler, History of the United States, 7 vols. (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1894-1913), 12.

49. Quoted in Buckingham, Specimens, 2: 97.

50. Boston Palladium, 15 July 1817; Connecticut Mirror, 18 August 1817.

51. National Intelligencer, 28 July 1817.

52. Quoted in Buckingham, Specimens, 2:97-98.

53. 53Ibid.

54. Federal Republican, 25 June 1819.

55. 28 July 1818, Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, 4:119.

56. Ibid.

57. Ibid., 23 January 1819, 4:227.

58. Ibid., 18 January 1820, 4:507-509.

59. Ibid., 2 December 1818, 4:185.

60. Ibid., 9 September 1822, 6:60-61.

61. Ibid., 14 September 1822, 6:63-4.

62. Ibid., 9 August 1823, 6:170. For more background on newspaper electioneering during the 1824 campaign, see Ammon, Fifth President, 28, and Ames, A History of the National Intelligencer, 127-148.

63. The history of government patronage of newspapers has been thoroughly documented in Culver H. Smith, The Press, Politics, and Patronage: The American Government's Use of Newspapers, 1789-1875 (Athens, Ga.: University of Georgia Press, 1977).

64. For details on the 1824 presidential election, see Baldasty, "The Press and Politics in the Age of Jackson."

65. Niles Weekly Register, 19 February 1825.


Back to David R. Davies' main page.
URL: http://ocean.st.usm.edu/~ddavies/madisonmonroe.html
URL: http://www.daviddavies.org/madisonmonroe.html