vided for the creation of an Indian territory west of the Mississippi River.

The process of removal went on rapidly. In December, 1835 Jackson announced that except for two small groups in Ohio and Indiana, not more than fifteen hundred in number, and the Cherokees, all the tribes east of the Mississippi had made an agreement regarding removal. By 1837, ninety-four Indian treaties had been concluded, for the most part ceding Indian lands to the United States.

Before the end of his second term Jackson enjoyed one more triumph in foreign affairs. In 1831 the United States and France had come to an agreement by which the French government had consented to pay twenty-five million francs, in full settlement of the claims of American citizens while the United States was to pay 1,500,000 francs. The treaty was duly ratified in February, 1832. The actual fulfillment of the treaty depended upon an appropriation by the French legislature, and because the treaty was unpopular, this had not been made. In 1834, Jackson recommended reprisals on French property, in case the French legislature still refused to act. This message caused considerable ill-feeling in France, but in 1835 the legislature finally made the appropriation, on condition that some of Jackson's remarks be satisfactorily explained.

Naturally Jackson refused to make any apologies, and again urged reprisals. He did, however, suggest that subjects in a president's message were purely domestic concerns, and the French government was willing to accept this as satisfactory. The matter was soon adjusted, and France paid the money.

The other important foreign problem, in connection with Texas, will be dealt with fully in connection with the addition of that country to the United States.

Jackson's final triumph was the nomination of Van Buren, his own choice, as his successor. At the President's suggestion, the party held a convention, supposedly of delegates "fresh from the people." Because of the operation of the spoils system, the beneficiaries were perhaps more conspicuous than untrained politicians. In the election, the managers were able to enforce strict party discipline, while Jackson so manipulated the federal patronage as to ensure Van Buren's success. In the electoral vote the "little magician" had forty-six more than all his competitors combined, and ninety-seven more than Harrison, the leading Whig candidate.

The operations of the so-called Whig party at this time bring out some of the peculiar features in American politics. Under that caption were included a far more heterogeneous mixture than that under the Jackson banner in 1828. The most conspicuous subdivision was the group of national Republicans, or the Adams-ClayWebster following, noted for their advocacy of a national bank and a protective tariff. At the other extreme were the determined states' rights element, which repudiated Jackson because he threatened the South Carolina nullifiers with violence. Many of the Anti-Masons drifted into the Whig party, as did various voters who feared Jackson's "tyranny." So diverse were these elements that they were never really consolidated. As a party the Whigs had few if any principles; they were neither radical nor conservative; they merely opposed Jackson. Under ordinary conditions there would have been nothing to hold the factions together. But the spoils system had brought in a new dispensation in politics, and the desire for federal jobs took the place of agreement on issues and leaders. The Whigs wanted the plums and that desire alone kept the party intact for over sixteen years. Twice the voters turned to it for a president, not because it had anything to offer, but simply because it was the only instrument available with which to punish the administration in power. Both parties were alike, in that they existed primarily to control and to enjoy the returns from the patronage. For this reason party history as such during these years is singularly devoid of great issues.

If this appears to be a somewhat disheartening conclusion for the "reign" of Andrew Jackson, it has at least the merit of truth. Jackson did inaugurate the policy of Indian removals, he regained a part of the West Indian trade, he settled the long-standing problem of French claims, and he destroyed the Second Bank. What he did to South Carolina is a matter more of opinion than of fact. To be sure the West entered actively into politics, but the new section could not have remained in the background, in any case. As subsequent history shows, Jackson did nothing to give the West permanent leadership in national affairs. That has come from the East and the South as frequently as from the West. Aside from these things and the spoils system, Jackson did little.

But the mark of Jackson's Kitchen Cabinet is still to be seen in American public life. Professional politicians still devote themselves

to the task of running the government, and they still dominate the votes. Down to 1900 the machine was kept intact by the use of federal patronage, in spite of limited civil service reform; even now there are enough offices left for the politicians so that more often than not patronage continues to overshadow principle.

The constant criticism of the system, from Jackson's time to the present, indicates that there is a certain amount of dissatisfaction with it. People feel that politics should be conducted differently, and they have launched reform after reform, to establish a new order. So far no great measure of success has come to reward them.

CHAPTER XXXIV

DEMOCRATS VERSUS WHIGS, 1837-1845

A number of circumstances have combined to give Martin Van Buren a low rank among the presidents of the United States. As the choice of Jackson he incurred the bitterness of the Whigs, many of whom were in a position to give wide publicity to their views. As one of the pioneer national spoilsmen he has long been anathema to the reformers. As a machine-made president he entered office with little popular support, and as chief executive during a severe "panic" he was held responsible for the period of hard times. Under that handicap it would have taken a genius to achieve success, and Van Buren was no genius. He was, however, a courteous, affable gentleman, and a man of considerably more than the average education and ability. His misfortunes were the product of forces beyond his control, although he and his predecessor may have been partly responsible for shaping some of those forces.

THE PANIC OF 1837

The outstanding feature of Van Buren's single term was the Panic of 1837, one of those serious economic crashes which have occasionally tormented the country. In dealing with a panic it is very easy to describe the symptoms, much easier than to explain the causes. Banks failed, business men failed, manufacturers failed; farmers saw their lands sold under foreclosure, voters saw the state governments refuse to pay their debts, some of which were repudiated entirely. The federal government saw its revenues shrink from an embarrassing surplus to a very troublesome deficit.

A small part of the difficulty may have been due to the fiscal and banking policy of the Jackson administration. There is no doubt that the placing of public funds in local banks and the distribution of the surplus revenue gave a great impetus to speculation. Everybody was buying something or investing in something. In New England money was put into new factories, in New York into factories, com

merce, and transportation, in the Middle West into farms and transportation, in the South into cotton culture and slaves. This was the period of great transportation schemes, when the canal was just beginning to feel the competition of the railroad. States which had mortgaged the future for years ahead to build canals had to begin over again and repeat the process with railroads. Because the actual volume of money available was nearly fixed, most of these new enterprises, East, West, and South were financed on credit. Because of the demand for credit, interest rates were high, so high that the American commercial centers were constantly attracting money from abroad. By 1836 the United States, as a community, was heavily in debt to Europe.

The difference between speculation and sound business is in many cases like the difference between heat and cold, one of degree, not principle. Sometimes the business world can carry for years at a time a high superstructure of credit without any difficulty; moreover a country may pass from a policy of retrenchment to one of extraordinary speculation and back again without a panic. Again, as in 1837, the period of prosperous expansion may be cut off by a sudden collapse. What makes the difference has never been entirely clear. Men whose ventures are carried off successfully within the period of prosperity are described as geniuses, builders of wealth; the same men, doing the very same things a year later are miserable speculators, parasites upon society.

In 1836, there had been enough money in circulation to sustain a vast volume of credit. In 1837, the same circulating medium was not sufficient to carry anywhere nearly the same amount of credit. No one has ever explained satisfactorily why the break came. One thing is certain, that the causes of this panic were not local. The difficulties were world-wide, and to all appearances, the first signs appeared in Europe. English bankers at the same time had financed English factories, American canals, and various other enterprises. Americans, either as corporations or as state governments, had borrowed nearly $2,000,000 from English creditors. They in turn had borrowed heavily in Europe. When the European lenders began to demand payment, the English bankers were obliged to call in their loans. At the very time of these demands, funds were needed in America to finance the speculations in cotton lands, wheat lands, and canals. The extended credit could not be converted into cash