Canada and the United States
could emerge, while also effectively foreshortening
historical time, so that even recent events seemed
remote" (p. 23). Her research in primary as well as
secondary sources could not be more thorough, and
the writing is always clear, even memorable on occasion. My favorite turn of phrase is "usable hauntings,"
as in "Irving thus provided a set of usable hauntings, a
more general way of seeing which valued ghostliness,
and a fertile equivocation [deliberate ambiguity about
his meaning] that served to prime the canvas for later
generations" (p. 77).
Richardson's book is completely free of jargon. I
suspect that some devotees of cultural studies who are
wedded to critical theory might find that a flaw, but it
is surely a virtue in terms of nonspecialist readers and
students. The publisher deserves particular praise for a
most attractive format and design. This book would
work well in upper-level courses for undergraduates in
disciplines ranging from history and literature to
American studies, folklore, and sociology.
MICHAEL KAMMEN
Cornell University
C. EDWARD SKEEN. 1816 America Rising. Lexington:
University Press of Kentucky. 2003. Pp. xvi, 299.
$35.00.
Some readers may have thought or hoped that the
notion of the "Era of Good Feelings" was dormant and
discredited, but not C. Edward Skeen. Although he
seeks to breathe new life into the concept, his version
of the so-called era is a diminished and truncated one.
For example, he refers more than once to "one brief
moment" (pp. xv, 231). The fleeting and ephemeral
nature of the era in question offers small hope that we
shall witness much of a revival of interest in it.
Skeen's decision to focus on a single year places his
work among the lengthening list of books of this genre.
The absolute essential for any study like this is that the
time span have major significance. In my judgment,
however, the year 1816 does not rise to that level, and
Skeen's study has not fully persuaded me to alter my
belief.
The author's central argument is that 1816 was "a
pivotal year of transition, particularly for the political
life of the nation" (p. xi). But he does not turn his
attention directly to the topic of political developments until chapter twelve, where he ably explores the
election of that year. The opening sentence of the
chapter, however, does little to encourage or entice the
reader: "Historians have found little excitement during
the 1810 presidenti:ll campaign" (p. 211). Yet, protests
Skeen later in the same paragraph, "the race was
hardly devoid of interest." He seems to be struggling to
convince himself as well as the reader. After a fairly
extensive examination of the various aspects of the
campaign and election, the author reaches this conclusion: "The election was essentially a non-event" (p.
229)-hardly a "pivotal year" in the nation's political
life.
AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW
903
Correctly claiming in chapter four that the most
serious questions confronting the Fourteenth Congress were financial ones, Skeen offers an engaging
investigation of the tariff and the national bank. He
demonstrates that there was widespread support in
Congress and in the nation for a protective tariff, an
understandable attitude in the immediate aftermath of
the extravagant expenditures required by the war.
Therefore, the new tariff bill did not generate much
controversy in Congress, other than some haggling
over rates for various imported goods. The national
bank proposal, however, faced more difficulty, thanks
in part to opposition raised by certain Federalists.
Even though John C. Calhoun, a bank proponent,
"passed lightly over the constitutional issue" (p. 66),
other members of Congress gave that topic a good bit
of attention. Not surprisingly, important details, such
as the amount of government-owned stock and the
number of government-appointed directors, absorbed
the energy of some of the debaters. But when the dust
settled after all the speeches and resolutions, both
houses solidly endorsed the national bank. John Randolph, well known for his contrarian views, declared
the bank to be inexpedient, unconstitutional, and
dangerous; yet he avowed that he was eager to purchase stock in it.
One may readily be excused for having forgotten the
Compensation Act of 1816, but in chapter five Skeen
rescues it from oblivion. He makes a convincing case
for the act's importance, particularly because of its
impact on members of Congress. Moreover, he boldly
contends that the adoption of this act "greatly accelerated the shift from deferential to popular politics"
(p. 77). In the spring of 1816, representatives and
senators agreed, without much hesitation, that they
needed and deserved a pay raise-a not unfamiliar
view for congressmen. But they had not reckoned on
the "hysterical reaction that followed" (p. 82). Across
the nation, newspaper editors eagerly rose to the
challenge as they fanned the flames of public outrage.
The voters were nondiscriminatory, for they directed
their wrath toward both Federalists and Republicans.
As the author notes, a higher than normal percentage
of members of Congress were not reelected in late
1816. The lame-duck session that began in December
had to confront the public's demand for repeal, and
the chastened congressmen speedily rescinded the act.
Skeen speculates that the future belonged to politicians who learned the lessons of the Compensation
Act, but one wonders.
The author devotes other chapters to a variety of
topics, such as internal improvements, state developments, crime and punishment, and humanitarian impulses. There is even a chapter on the extraordinary
weather in the summer of 1816. Skeen has done
prodigious research in a wealth of primary materials,
and his entire book benefits greatly as a result. Overall,
JUNE 2004
904
Reviews of Books and Films
he has produced a thoughtful work that stimulates the
reader to ponder the postwar nation anew.
PAUL H. BERGERON
University of Tennessee
DAN MONROE. The Republican Vision of John Tyler.
College Station: Texas A&M University Press. 2003.
Pp. x, 252. $39.95.
Dan Monroe's study of John Tyler's career down
through his presidency attempts to address and redress
the oft-made charge that Tyler was a fanatic whose
extremism destroyed his own public life and seriously
jeopardized the political viability and economic program of the Whig Party. Monroe contends that, to the
contrary, Tyler's policies were principled and were
derived from, and consistent with, a republican ideology inherited from Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. From Tyler's education at William and Mary
College through his life in politics as United States
representative, governor of Virginia, senator, and finally president, he remained intent on "acting in a
virtuous republican manner." Although Monroe is
careful to point out the pragmatic turns in Tyler's
public positions and policy decisions, readers will
conclude that his republican principles were axiomatic
and controlling. Put in other terms, Tyler consistently
looked to an idyllic and static Jeffersonian past for
guidance in an imperfect and politically fluid present.
Throughout his career, Tyler remained suspicious
of, and hostile to, centralization of power in the
national government, the presidency, and economic
institutions such as the Bank of the United States.
Instead he embraced states' rights, a strict construction
of the Constitution, and an agrarian view of economic
development and the creation of wealth. Equally influential on Tyler's temper and policies was a southern
sense of honor and sensitivity to slight that only served
to harden his commitment to republican principles.
The confluence of ideology (which was timeless and
universal) and honor (regionally specific to the South),
Monroe argues, made inflexible Tyler's opposition to
Henry Clay's efforts to resuscitate the Bank of the
United States. His vetoes were at once a defense of a
republican vision of government and an agrarian economy, and a rebuke to partisan-and personal-criticism of himself. From his opposition to bankruptcy
legislation during his tenure in the House of Representatives to his advocacy of Texas annexation as
president, Tyler's policies were a consistent extension
and reflection of republicanism and personal honor.
Monroe does a very good job of untangling the
various threads that, woven together, constituted the
republican vision of the revolutionary generation. He
also deftly demonstrates how that revolutionary heritage was adopted by Tyler and adapted by him to the
political world of the 1830s and 1840s. The strength of
Monroe's work-its inward-looking, close, and descriptive analysis of Tyler's public career-also constitutes its weakness. First, Monroe tends to internalize
AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW
Tyler's worldview and uses it as the standard by which
to judge all other political actors and decisions. Andrew Jackson and Clay, not surprisingly, come in for
some rough handling. J ackson both personifies and
reifies executive usurpation; Clay, too, appears intent
on personal political aggrandizement at the expense of
republican government and governance. Monroe does
not consider whether Jackson or Clay might have been
motivated by republican principles at variance with
those of Tyler. Opposing, principled views of the
nullification, the bank, or Texas annexation are neither
discussed nor analyzed.
By extension, then, Monroe does not adequately
acknowledge or describe the larger political universe
in which Tyler operated. To be fair, Monroe's purpose
is to explicate the Virginian's seemingly willful and
self-destructive political behavior, and he makes a
strong, creditable case for Tyler being the most prominent of an ever-diminishing cadre of Jeffersonian
republicans. Yet the fact that his principles failed to
resonate more widely either within the Democracy,
Whiggery, or the national electorate is suggestive and
beyond the scope of Monroe's analytical framework.
So, too, is any larger consideration of how slavery
intersected with and was incorporated into Tyler's
republican vision. To be sure, Monroe carefully explores how the problematic issue of slavery extension
affected Tyler's opposition to restriction in the Missouri Crisis and undergirded his advocacy of Texas
annexation. But how slavery, whether as an institution
or as a trope, complemented or contradicted republicanism is not taken up in any meaningful way.
For such a focused study, Tyler the man remains
oddly elusive. Monroe's effort to make the case for
Tyler's principled behavior and his own internalization
of the Jeffersonian paradigm produces a political
narrative that tends to oversimplify the republican
legacy and the inconsistencies that characterized his
presidency. Tyler's equivocal positions on the Bank of
the United States, executive power (or usurpation),
and congressional governance are eclipsed and obscured by an analytical framework that downplays
contingency and change over time to emphasize the
certitude of ideological consistency.
For all of that, Monroe has fashioned a powerful
and to a large extent persuasive defense of Tyler's
principles and his principled behavior. Although some
readers may prefer a larger sense of the political
universe of Jacksonian America or of Tyler himself,
Monroe's work is informed by a wide array of secondary sources, and it is built on a close reading of Tyler's
published speeches and correspondence. As such, it is
the most insightful treatment of the motives and
repUblican assumption that animated the public behavior and private beliefs of this much-maligned and
misunderstood president.
MICHAEL A. MORRISON
Purdue University
JUNE 2004