Эту статью мне посоветовала прочитать моя подруга, которая обожает скачивать http://inym.ru с сайтов, потому что это удобно, не требует вложений, это интересно, и очень просто можно получить то, что нужно. Some of John Tyler’s contemporaries called him inflexible, stubborn, and obstinate. A more complete description may have added "beleaguered.” He was the first president to obtain office because his predecessor had died. Without support from his own political party, without much support in Congress, and operating under the derisive label "His Accidency,” Tyler found he had to fight hard to make others understand he was the legitimate president. He told the cabinet that he inherited from William Henry Harrison: "I am very glad to have . . . such able statesmen as you. But I can never consent to being dictated to as to what I shall or shall not do. . . . I am the President. . . . When you think otherwise, your resignations will be accepted.” Despite his determination, many leading politicians spurned him and set out to destroy him. 84 John Tyler k John Tyler came from a wealthy family, part of Virginia’s plantation elite. He was born on March 29, 1790, in Charles County to John Tyler, a planter and judge, and Mary Marot Armistead Tyler, who died when young John was only seven. Judge Tyler’s estate, located along the James River, encompassed 12,000 acres and 45 slaves. Young John received an education from tutors before entering the College of William and Mary in 1802. After graduating in 1807, he lived in Richmond with his father, who had just been elected governor, and studied law. In 1809 he was admitted to the bar and went on to specialize in criminal justice. Tyler entered politics two years later, when he won election to the state House of Delegates. In March 1813 he married Letitia Christian, the daughter of a planter. They had four daughters and three sons. The marriage solidified his social ties with the state’s leading plantation families. John Tyler was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1816. There he applied his belief in states’ rights and a strict reading of the Constitution. In 1819 his conservative views caused a split between him and General Andrew Jackson when he denounced Jackson’s seizure of Pensacola in Spanish Florida during a war against the Indians. Tyler argued that Jackson had exceeded his constitutional authority in trespassing on foreign soil. His criticism of the immensely popular general has been described by a biographer, Oliver Perry Chitwood, in John Tyler: Champion of the Old South, as "exhibiting a courage and disinterestedness that have been only too rare in the history of American statesmanship.” Tyler insisted the power of the Union flowed not from the people but from the states and that all sovereignty rested in the states. Although he praised the Union, he recognized a state’s right to secession. In 1820, when Congress debated whether to allow Missouri into the Union with slavery intact, he argued that every state had the right to determine its own institutions and that the federal government should impose no restrictions. He added that slavery’s growth in Missouri and its spread elsewhere would cause the demand for slaves to outstrip the supply and, as a consequence, benefit all slaves by making them more valuable and encouraging their owners to treat them more kindly. That same year Tyler opposed a higher protective tariff passed by Congress, saying it would reduce imports and result in fewer agricultural exports. His stand revealed a Jeffersonian agrarianism that complemented his states’ rights ideology. Tyler never abandoned this outlook, for it emanated from Virginia’s planter class as strongly as did wealth, and over the years he showed a steadfast attachment to it—either through grit or stubbornness—that belied a gentle character others mistook for weakness. Tyler served in the Virginia House of Delegates from 1823 to 1825 and then was elected governor. His term proved uneventful. He then won election to the U.S. Senate in 1827. He again expressed his states’ rights position during the nullification crisis of the early 1830s when South Carolina said it would prohibit collection of the federal tariff within its borders. Tyler disliked South Carolina’s decision but strenuously opposed Andrew Jackson’s Force Bill, which reasserted the president’s right to send troops into a rebellious state. When the bill passed Congress he said it "swept away the barriers of the Constitution and [gave] us in place of the Federal government, under which we had fondly believed we were living, a consolidated military despotism.” Determined to defuse the crisis and keep the Union together, Tyler worked behind the scenes to help craft a compromise in 1833 that modified the tariff. Still, the dispute made him uneasy about the Democratic Party, which he had joined because of its commitment to states’ rights. Although Tyler could agree with Andrew Jackson’s dismantling of the national bank, an institution the Virginian considered an excessive use of federal authority, he thought the president was hungry for power and unpredictable. John Tyler 85 In 1834 he called Jackson a "man who on all his proceedings appears to be more the creature of passion than of judgment.” Tyler’s Senate career came to an abrupt end in a collision between his steadfast attachment to principle and a political ploy by the Democrats. In 1835, two years after the Senate had censored Jackson for arbitrarily removing federal funds from the national bank, the president’s supporters pushed to have the censorship expunged from the records. Tyler opposed the move, both because it went against his earlier vote to censor Jackson and because he thought it unconstitutional, but Virginia Democrats convinced the state legislature to instruct him and fellow senator Benjamin Leigh to vote for expunction. They believed neither man would agree with the instructions and both would resign, allowing them to appoint loyal Democrats in their stead. Leigh, however, ruined their plan by deciding to ignore the instructions. Leaders of the emerging Whig Party, who at the time were attracting Tyler to their cause, urged him to do the same so his seat would be protected and he and Leigh could present a united front, but Tyler refused. He called it unprincipled to reject instructions sent by the people through their legislature. Instead, in February 1836 he resigned. Despite his decision, the Whigs nominated Tyler that year to run for vice president with two of the three candidates they offered for the White House, William Henry Harrison and Hugh L. White. All the Whig candidates lost, but in 1838 Tyler returned to public office when he once more won election to the Virginia House of Delegates. In 1840 the Whigs again nominated William Henry Harrison for president, this time as their sole candidate. A military hero known for his battle against the Indians at Tippecanoe in Indiana, Harrison appealed strongly to westerners and Northerners. He also appealed to the nationalistic wing of the Whig Party, who supported federal funding of internal improvements and the restoration of a national bank. To balance the ticket and appeal to Southerners and states’ righters, the Whigs nominated John Tyler for vice president. By and large, contemporaries considered his selection unimportant; vice presidents wielded little power, and no one expected him to become president. Although at odds with Harrison and other leading Whigs on several issues, Tyler said little during the campaign, and the Whigs went on to win the election. He and Harrison were sworn into office in March 1841. Then the unexpected happened. On April 4, 1841, President Harrison died from pneumonia. A messenger notified Tyler of Harrison’s death, and Tyler rushed to Washington to assume the presidency on April 6. Uncertainty and controversy over his official status surfaced immediately. The Constitution was unclear on whether, in the event of the president’s death, the vice president became acting president or president outright—that is, whether the duties of the office or the office itself devolved on the vice president. Some legal scholars such as Joseph Story had written that a vice president becomes president and remains so until the next election, but others dissented. Needing a quick decision, Harrison’s cabinet met with Tyler soon after he arrived. The Virginian insisted he was president in office as well as in name. After some discussion, the cabinet agreed and decided to have Tyler take the oath of office, a move that reaffirmed their decision and set an important precedent. Few Whigs expected any problems with John Tyler. A party newspaper, the National Intelligencer, stated on April 7: "President Tyler is a Whig—a true Whig, and we risk nothing in expressing our entire confidence that he will fulfill in all their extent, the expectations of the People. . . .” Although Tyler quickly put the cabinet in line when he said he would refuse their dictation, he believed, as did other Whigs, in limited executive power and said the president should never remove from office those entrusted with handling federal moneys—a reference to Andrew Jackson’s firing of two treasury secretaries. Further, by keeping Harrison’s cabinet intact, he affirmed continuity with 86 John Tyler Whig policies. At the same time, many states’ righters expressed confidence in Tyler based on his previous record. A close observer, however, would have found differences between Tyler and many Whigs. Most important, he objected to what the Whigs had intended for Harrison—that the president be little more than a figurehead, with the real power wielded by Congress. Tyler may have opposed Jacksonian-style executive authority, but he also opposed letting Congress prevail over the presidency; in his view a middle ground worked best, and he intended to pursue it. This stance brought him into conflict with one of the most ambitious politicians in Washington: Henry Clay. The Kentuckian intended to rule the nation from the Senate and would tolerate no opposition from Tyler. Clay reportedly declared: "Tyler dare not resist; I will drive him before me.” Simply put, Clay wanted to be president. He expected to win the office in 1844. Toward that end he and other Whigs had convinced President Harrison to serve only one term. But Tyler made no such promise, and if "His Accidency” were a successful and widely popular president, he might ruin Clay’s plan. That was all Clay needed to decide that the president, Whig or not, had to be destroyed. Tyler faced numerous obstacles in meeting Clay’s challenge or exerting any substantial power. For one, he had never held a leadership position in the Whig Party or established close ties to its leaders. For another, his reserved temperament made him unable to appeal directly to the people, as had Andrew Jackson, and thus denied him a possible weapon in circumventing Clay. Finally, many Northerners distrusted Tyler’s Virginia plantation background. In May 1841 Tyler and Clay engaged in a pitched battle during a special session of Congress that had been called in March by President Harrison to handle a severe economic depression. Clay intended to win approval for a national bank. Tyler opposed the bank, saying it would be an unconstitutional extension of federal power. Both men fought for principles— Clay for nationalism, Tyler for states’ rights. Both men also looked toward 1844 and the presidential election. Even before Congress met, Tyler indicated to Clay that he would veto any bank bill. Clay’s friends advised him to proceed with caution to avoid tearing the party apart, but he ignored them. When the session began, most Whigs in the Senate wanted a strong national bank, but the party held only a slight majority over the Democrats, leaving little room for dissension. After Tyler indicated he would be willing to sign a bill establishing a national bank if its branches were opened only in those states that permitted them, Clay responded that the federal government should determine where its bank’s branches should be placed, and he would settle for nothing less. To allow the states to influence any of the bank’s operations, he said, would be disastrous. Clay clearly had politics on his mind; he believed if Congress accepted a compromise plan, Tyler would be recognized as a great conciliator, and that could only boost the president’s prestige and popularity. Congress eventually sent Tyler legislation closest to Clay’s proposal. After the president vetoed it, Clay unleashed a venomous speech. He accused the president of operating from excessive pride, vanity, and egotism and of being unable to "see beyond the little, petty, contemptible circles of his own personal interests.” He said Tyler had usurped Congress and denied the will of the people, as expressed in the Whig victory of 1840. His statement failed to mention that the Whigs had refused to write a party platform that year, believing a stand in favor of a national bank would cost them the election. Clay continued the hunt. According to historian Norma Lois Peterson in The Presidencies of William Henry Harrison and John Tyler, the Kentuckian "exerted extreme pressure on Whigs who even dared hint that Tyler . . . was due at least a modicum of consideration. More than Clay wanted a bank, he wanted to bring down Tyler. . . .” Congress passed a second bank bill after Tyler initially indicated he might sign it, but he instead used his veto. John Tyler 87 With that, five of the six members of his cabinet resigned, encouraged to do so by Clay. Harsh editorials condemned the president; he was burned in effigy in many cities and received hundreds of assassination threats. On September 13, 1841, a caucus of Whig congressmen declared they could no longer be responsible for Tyler’s actions; in effect, they booted him from the party. The president had actually supported much Whig legislation, but the bank bill, Clay’s ambition, and Tyler’s unwillingness to let Congress dominate the executive persuaded the Whigs to act. From that point on, the Whig congress rejected nearly all of John Tyler’s domestic proposals. Nevertheless, in 1842 the muchmaligned president showed considerable tact in handling a rebellion in Rhode Island led by Thomas W. Dorr. Dorr had declared a separate state government after the legislature refused to reform the state constitution to end property qualifications for voting and for holding office. When the governor asked Tyler to send in troops, the president advocated restraint and refused to act without evidence of a violent insurrection. After Dorr’s followers seized state office buildings, Tyler warned them to disband within 24 hours or face military reprisal. The rebels surrendered without bloodshed. President Tyler’s achievements in foreign affairs rivaled those of any previous administration. In 1842 his secretary of state, Daniel Webster, reached an agreement with Britain over the boundary between Canada and Maine, after Tyler stepped in at a crucial moment and saved the talks. Under the Webster-Ashburton Treaty, the United States obtained 7,000 of the 12,000 square miles of rich timberland under dispute. The two sides agreed as well to patrol the African coast jointly in an effort to disrupt the illegal transatlantic slave trade. The treaty passed Congress easily, despite the Whig dislike of Tyler, and earned widespread praise. During a Whig dinner in New York City, a toast to Lord Ashburton evoked approval, while one to Tyler met with silence. Thousands of New Yorkers subsequently protested what they rightly considered a snub of the president. In December 1842 Tyler presented Congress with a Webster-composed message that extended the Monroe Doctrine to Hawaii. The Tyler Doctrine, as it was called, noted that since nearly all ships in Hawaiian harbors were American and that the Hawaiian monarchy was weak, the United States would disapprove of any nation trying to exert control over the islands. As Britain expanded its exclusive trading rights in China during the early 1840s, Tyler worried that Asian ports would be closed to the United States. As a result, in 1844 he signed the Treaty of Wanghia with China, which granted America most-favored-nation trading privileges. The greatest controversy in foreign affairs, and one that had serious domestic implications, involved Texas, the slave-permitting republic established by American settlers after they had won their independence from Mexico. In the 1840s Texans sought to be annexed by the United States, but many Northerners opposed the move, considering it nothing less than a plot to expand America’s slave territory. Intrigue permeated the dispute. While President Tyler moved slowly on the issue, Sam Houston and other Texas leaders flirted with Britain as a means to pressure the United States. According to rumors, Britain would soon provide money to Texas so the Lone Star Republic could end its slavery and serve as a haven for runaways from the South. This would satisfy British abolitionists and help the British weaken the United States by disrupting its economy. The money would also draw Texas and Britain closer together in an alliance that would threaten America’s southwestern border. Tyler inadvertently intensified the Texas controversy in 1844 when he appointed John C. Calhoun as secretary of state to succeed Abel Parker Upshur, who had died in a tragic accident. Calhoun came from South Carolina, and his strident proslavery advocacy made the debate more sectional by shifting attention away from annexation of Texas as beneficial to 88 John Tyler the entire nation to annexation of Texas as beneficial to the South. On April 12, 1844, the United States signed a treaty with Texas to annex it as a territory and promised to defend it against any attack by Mexico. At the same time Calhoun sent a long letter to the British government in which he said the United States must annex Texas both to protect its own happiness and prosperity and to protect slavery. He presented a discourse on race, in essence an international primer, in which he said blacks could never survive without the kindly paternalism of their masters. There were more deaf, dumb, blind, insane, and idiot blacks in the North than in the South, he said, because free blacks lived under conditions more horrible than bondage. President Tyler held milder views about slavery. Although he owned slaves, he disliked the institution and refrained from promoting a proslave philosophy. On the other hand, he never freed his own slaves, nor did he try to end slavery. Instead, he disliked abolitionists for making dangerous statements that could cause a slave rebellion; he hoped slavery would just fade away. Irrespective of Tyler’s views, to many Northerners Calhoun’s letter amounted to an incitement. The annexation of Texas along with the possible American acquisition of Oregon dominated presidential politics in 1844. In May that year, Tyler tried to form a third party consisting of conservative states’ rights Democrats and disaffected Whigs. As the Democrats convened in Baltimore to nominate a presidential candidate, the Tylerites met nearby, and with chants of "Tyler and Texas!” they chose him to run. Tyler held little hope of beating the Democrats and Whigs. He really wanted to pressure the Democrats into accepting annexation; they did so when they followed former president Andrew Jackson’s advice and rejected frontrunner Martin Van Buren in favor of a committed expansionist, James K. Polk. In June the Senate defeated the annexation treaty, and Tyler forged ahead with his presidential campaign. This caused Democrats to fear he would drain votes from Polk and throw the election to Whig candidate Henry Clay. After the Democrats assured Tyler they would support Texas annexation and would provide federal jobs to his supporters, he withdrew from the race and backed Polk. With Polk’s victory in November, President Tyler proposed annexing Texas as a state rather than a territory. This meant that instead of a treaty requiring a two-thirds vote in the Senate, a resolution could be passed by a majority vote in Congress as a whole. Tyler expected the measure to win approval based on the earlier commitment he had received from Democrats to support annexation, and it passed despite continued northern opposition and considerable debate over whether a foreign nation could be annexed as a state. Tyler signed the bill on March 1, 1845, with just three days remaining in his term. According to the resolution, he still had to decide whether to begin immediate annexation or opt for new negotiations with Texas. At first he thought the decision should be left to the incoming president, James K. Polk, but his cabinet, and especially Calhoun, urged him to act. On March 2, therefore, he annexed Texas. Massachusetts congressman John Quincy Adams, a former president and foe of slavery, reacted by calling Tyler’s action "the heaviest calamity that ever befell myself and my country. . . . I regard it as the apoplexy of the Constitution.” But Tyler considered it a monumental achievement, one that would rescue his presidency from historical oblivion. After Polk’s inauguration, Tyler retired to Sherwood Forest, his plantation in Virginia. He took with him a new bride, Julia Gardiner, many years his junior, whom he had married in June 1844 after the death of his first wife; they would have seven children. In 1861 Tyler presided over a peace conference intended to avoid civil war. That November he won election to the Confederate House of Representatives, but on January 12, 1862, he suffered a stroke. He died six days later, on January 18. When John Tyler left the White House, he firmly believed he was leaving the country in better shape than when he had come into office. John Tyler 89 The economy was rebounding, in part owing to increased trade with the Far East; states’ rights had been successfully defended, though with some concessions to nationalists; the dispute with Britain over Canada had been resolved; and Texas had been annexed. The Richmond Enquirer said about Tyler: "Erroneous as his policy may have been in several particulars, yet his presidency was responsible for a number of brilliant events. Posterity at least will do him justice in these respects, if the present age denies it.” Posterity, though, has been harsh. Most historians rank his presidency as mediocre; many others rank it much lower. Few Americans today know of Tyler, except perhaps as the first "president by accident.” Yet his administration reveals the mix between principle and opportunism in American politics, both in his actions and those of
his opponents who tried so hard to destroy him.