CIVILIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CIVILIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES
Introduction
• The period: 1600s to 1880
• Note on Native-Americans
• 6 lectures
Colonial Times (1 & 2)
• Areas of settlement and phases of colonization
• Motives of English emigrants to the New World
• Colonial Episodes
• Colonial Heritage
Independence (1 &2)
• Events, facts, chronology
• Meaning of facts, global interpretation
• War of/for Independence (1775-1781)
• American « Revolution » (1763-1789)
From Young Republic to reconstruction (1790-1877) (1 &2)
Part One: Thematic Approach
• Territorial Expansion
• Population
• Economic Growth (4 maps)
• Voting Rights
• The Peculiar Institution
• Native Americans (2 maps)
Part two: Three periods
° Young Republic (1789-1828)
° Antebellum Period (1829-1860)
° Civil War and Reconstruction (1861-1877)
Conclusion: The “First American Century”
A (Mostly) Historical Introduction to the Civilization of the United States
The period: 1600s to 1880
•« The beginning is half the whole »
•Aristotle
6 Self-Contained Lectures
•Colonial Times I (1600s-1770s)
•Colonial Times II
•Independence
•The Young Republic (1790-1830)
•The Antebellum Period (1830-1860)
•The Civil War and Reconstruction (1860-1880)
I. NATIVE AMERICANS
•A variety of native peoples lived within the present borders of the US
•No society had achieved literacy but many had developed sophisticated methods of farming,
hunting or fishing, political and societal systems and far-reaching networks of trade and
communication
•No sense of a single unified people
•But common features in religion (single creator, no clear distinction between natural and
supernatural) ;relation to land and property (no devotion to the accumulation of wealth and
property) ; gender relations
•In 1492 Indian population est. 2-5 million for present-day US (total est. of 50-90 million for
America)
•Military Action/Brutality (The Spanish Conquistadores)
•Most important factor in catastrophic population decline : diseases (smallpox, influenza,
measles). Indians had not developed antibodies to fight these diseases
•In North America, the effects of English colonization in keeping with general trend:
–Biological exchange
–Intensification of warfare between Indian tribes and peoples
II. COLONIAL
A. Areas of settlement
•Roanoke: the lost colony (1587-1590)
•Jamestown, Virginia, 1607
•New England: Pilgrim Fathers (Mayflower, Plymouth, 1620 ; John Winthrop, 1630)
•Middle colonies:
•Maryland (Lord Baltimore)
•Pennsylvania (« The Holy Experiment », William Penn)
•The West…
B. Phases of Settlement
•Two successive phases
•By 1640: Virginia, New England, Maryland
•After 1660: Additional Southern colonies, New Netherlands (1664), Pennsylvania (1681),
Delaware (1682), Georgia (1733)
•The Thirteen Colonies
C. Motives of Early Immigrants
•Religious
•Economic
•Political
•Utopian
•Any combination thereof…
First Impressions
•« starving time »
•« The air at 12 leagues’ distance smelt as sweet as a new blown garden »
•« Heaven and earth never agreed better to frame a place for man’s habitation »
•(John Smith, founder of colony of Virginia)
And many years later…
•« I became aware of the old island here that flowered once for Dutch sailors’ eyes – a fresh
green breast of the new world. Its vanished trees …had once pandered in whispers to the last
and greatest of all human dreams… »
•Francis Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby, 1925
D. The Pilgrim Fathers
•« The place they had thoughts on was some of those vast and unpeopled countries of
America, which are fruitful and fit for habitation, being devoid of all civil inhabitants, where
there are only savage and brutish men which range up and down, little otherwise than the wild
beasts of the same… »
•William Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation
•« For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon
us… so that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so
cause him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word
through the world »
John Winthrop, Model of Christian Charity, 1630
The business side…
•Charter companies/land grants
•Massachusetts Bay Company
•Expensive passage
•Colonizing agencies: contract laborers for life
•Indentured servant
•A widespread system in the early phase
E. Colonial Episodes
1. Indian Wars
•Pequot War in New England (1636_1637)
•King Philip’s War (1675-1676) or Metacom’s War
•French and Indian War (1756-1763)
•Episodes in Virginia
2. The beginning of slavery
•20 slaves in Jamestown (Dutch ship, 1619)
•An economic problem: indentured servants v. slaves
•1750 : 240,000
1790 : 680,000
•Tobacco, rice, cotton: towards the « peculiar institution »
3. The Great Awakening
•Jonathan Edwards (Northampton, Ma)
•George Whitefield
•Revivalism, evangelicalism:
- direct access to religious experience
- long term effects: revolt against Calvinism, unifying force, American experience
F. Colonial Heritage
•The English Speaking Colonies in North America (1770)
•The Common English Heritage
•Religion
•Ownership of property
•The American, a « new man » ?
Hector St John de Crèvecoeur (1782)
•« What then is the American this new man? He is either a European, or the descendant of a
European, hence a strange mixture of blood, which you find in no other country… He is
American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners receives new ones
from the new mode of life he has embraced… »
G. Population
•1629: est. 2500
•1640: est. 5700
•1700: est. 265,000
•1770: est. 2,300 000
•1492-1770: sharp decline
of Indian population
The birth and growth of the American constitution from
1787 to 1937
Lecture 1: 1600-1787: from the 1st colonial charter to the 1787
Constitution
Historical and political context:
Constitution: the system of beliefs and laws by which a country or a state is governed
A document that describes this system
Physical health and condition of a person or an animal
(read the constitution)
1.
American political culture before the revolution:
American colonies were organized differently
The Virginia charter had 3 distinctive features:

Written for another continent far away from London

Created a colony, derived its force and authority from the king and
private investors

Very specific purpose: small government “meant to spread
christanity”=> to make money

The 1st American colony soon enjoyed autonomy and economic power
“No taxation without representation”
They compared their constitution to those of Great Britain: resorted to a political theory:
mixed government thought to be a good government.
To prevent tyranny-> represent the interest of 3 entities: King, Lords, people => balance
The American faced many problems
They believed that the interests of people elected
Colonial governors: extensive power -> budget-> lack of taxing, they were unable to get the
law respected
Extensive but uncompleted power of elected assemblies=> political crisis
2.
From Independence to the Federal convention of 1787:
4 July 1776: Declaration of Independence
A revolution ->specific form of government, they asked for freedom
(look: moodle “free and independent states”)
Articles of confederation: drafted in 1777= a looser form of federation, the parts are less
close
Created kind of a united states
It created a loose reliance (article 8): the states contributed voluntarily in the national budget
=>money problems
USA-> no money to defend the state against Indians and British-> virtual and disunited
country
Some American bet that a new government was needed
Gradual change: 1786: American state decided to sign Annapolis*to solve commercial
disputes
Another meeting would be necessary to discuss the future of the USA
1786: articles of confederation should be amended, new provisions should be added
(boundary disputes, commercial disputes), were set for the next year=> federal convention:
Philadelphia convention
Surprise! Some representatives of American state came not to amend the articles but with a
plan to remove them
They came with a plan for a constitution. One of them Is James Madison: stated that a
national government ought to be established (moodle) => that plan was the first draft of the
American Constitution
New theories: new form of government:

not to be a mixed country

new constitution for a country without a king and a very large country
(13 countries)

Political theories in 1787: inspiration ->ancient philosopher:
Aristotle…
(Three ratification debates)
Natural rights philosophers: John Lock
British philosophy (glorious revolution) -> theory of government which made men source of
government
Sovereignty came from people and not from God =>popular sovereignty
Montesquieu: 1689-1755 de l’esprit des lois : separation of power between 3 branches:
executive, legislative and judicial
The framers were political innovators, borrowed from John Lock theories
Political innovation are explained in the federalist papers (wikipédia): series of essays
promoting for the ratification of the constitution, explained the constitution: best seller, best
guide book for the constitution
October 1787-August 1788
Political innovation constitution: Montesquieu: explained that republics as a political model
who works in small republics-> framers-> large republic-> contribution to a stable form of
government (moodle page 14)
It was not enough to have 3 separate branches (moodle page 15)
Ambition must be made to contract ambition: every branch had to check the two others.
1- Where does the Anti-Federalist label come from?
2- Who were the Anti-Federalist?
3- What Anti-Federalists believed?
1.
Group of people on the losing side of history, in 1787-1789. Their ideas haven't
disappeared completely.
Anti-federalists are defined by what they didn't believe, and not by what they actually
believed.
The Federalists believe in favoring the establishment of a strong federal, i.e. central
government.
Federalists are in favor of 1787 constitution. The opposition with anti-fed lasted two or
three years. Anti-Fed advocated against the writing of this constitution.
Anti-Fed wanted to take it slow, whereas the Feds wanted to change as quickly as
possible. New Jersey Plan for anti-fed (contrary to Philadelphia Proposition for Feds, I think).
Anti-fed were conservatives, they were against change. They believed that any reform
should be well thought out and incremental. They were patriots, were concerned by the health
and well-being of any citizens.
We don't know all of them. Some of their names, identities or biographies are a
mystery. They used pseudonyms.
For example, Johan de Witt (17th century) was the governor of Holland in the
Netherlands. At that time, the Netherlands were a confederation, an alliance of provinces (a
bit like the USA). Holland was the most important of those provinces. He was a kind of
President for the Republic of the Seven United Provinces. He brought peace and stability to
the provinces. He was a republican (in favor of a government without a king). He didn't
change a national government, he didn't turn the seven provinces into one country; he worked
to have the seven provinces work and trade together.
The achievements of Johan de Witt inspired John de Witt (an anti-Fed at the end of the
18th century). He promoted peace, unity amongst the States, without having one republic.
Johan de Witt was lynched by a mob of royalists led by William of Orange... who was
the first of a dynasty that would tyrannize the United States.
2.
Robert Yates was born in upstate New York in 1738. He was a member of the gentry:
he was moderately wealthy. He studied law, was a patriot, took part in the Am Revolution. He
helped draw the first Constitution of New York (1775-1777). He was against a national tax,
against a strong government. He attended the Philly Convention, as a member of the New
York (representation); he left the Convention early to warn his friends/collaborators.
George Clinton (gov. of New York): one of the most vocal opponent of the
Constitution during the Philadelphia Convention.
Patrick Henry: gave a famous speech ending with “Give me liberty or give me death!”.
He was born in 1736 in VA (about the same age as Yates). He was a member of the elite (born
in plantation); he did not study much and started to work at 15. He was a failure, didn't
succeed on his own. His father was a wealthy man. Henry was a skilled orator, and that's how
he became a lawyer (at that time, no law school, no law degree). He became a prominent
lawyer in colonial Virginia by defending Virginia against the Anglican Church (wanted to be
paid more taxes from Virginians). The judge was his father... Patrick Henry was then elected
to the VA colonial assembly, led opposition to the Stamp Act in VA, gave his famous speech
to encourage his fellow Virginians to go to war. After the war, became governor of VA.
3.
Anti-fed are reminding that the Philadelphia Convention was exceeded (?). They
accused the Fed to have staged a legal coup, to change the articles of the Constitution.
Another argument: the Constitution lacked something essential, something the 13
States had: a Bill of Rights.
The Fed won their battle in 1788, when New Hampshire became the 9th State to ratify
the Constitution (two thirds of the 13 States were needed). The Feds had won, and were ready
to make concessions => Bill of Rights (10 first amendments of the Constitution).
The Bill of Rights protects the individuals liberties (freedom of speech, of expression,
of conscience, of thought); freedom of press, of worship (separation between State and
Church); right to bear arms, etc...
The Constitution created a strong national government.
Art 1, Sec 8: “elastic clause”, strong tool for the Feds; possibility for the national
government to be as strong as possible.
10th Amendment: powers not listed in the Constitution, go to the States.
There's a balance of powers between the federal governments and the States.
Fed: trustees
Anti-Fed believed that … should be delegates, had to be told directly by electors what
to do
Americans still celebrate the Constitution today, but forget about the Anti-Fed.
1798: KY and VA Revolution. Jefferson and Madison (leaders) believed that the
Constitution was written in the name of the States, and not in the name of the people. Thus,
they had a right to ignore the Constitution when they saw it fit. Even though the Constitution
was adopted, it was not accepted by everyone. Some people wanted to nullify federal laws.
I)
II)
The 1820s: a decade of change
“Is not the whole Union a rope of sand?”
Delegate: choose someone to do something; to give control/responsibility/authority to
someone
Trustee: believe that someone is reliable to do something; more freedom of will for the trustee
(see more definition on Moodle)
Biggest problem of the US in the 19th century: slavery. In some states, more than half
the population were not free, were black slaves. Big difference, even in 1790, between North
and South! For some people, Americans were too different in their habits to have a good
federal government. It's difficult to rule all the Americans as one nation, to treat every
American the same.
The situation was even worse in 1830. Cotton was the n°1 export, the most valuable
export, in the US economy in the 19th century. Hard to ban slavery...
The US in the 1820s was a very different country than the US at the end of the 18th
century. Territorial expansion: Louisiana purchase at a bargain price; new States admitted in
the Union (IL, AL, Mississippi, Louisiana); the American expected the Pacific Ocean to be
their natural western border; war of 1812 against the British (victory) that generated an
intense feeling of patriotism (it was the year the Star Spangled Banner was written) => need
for strong army, strong navy, transportation infrastructure, strongly reliable banking system to
fund these. Need for tariffs, too.
The federal government decided to build a national road, to connect the Atlantic
coastline to the Mississippi River (Baltimore → Cumberland → Columbus → Indianapolis →
St Louis/Alton).
The Americans needed tariffs needed tariffs to protect their products, their market,
from the British manufacture, who was more productive (industrial Revolution). Steam
engines, machines, tools, mills, guns...
In 1816 a tariff law was passed. People from the South didn't benefit from those
tariffs: British started to go elsewhere for their cotton, somewhere cheaper like Egypt and
India; and everything made of steel had its price doubled, which was not convenient for
producers in the South, who used those items.
Sectionalism: definition on Moodle
Many States on the East Coast felt that they did not need to pay for the National Road;
they didn't need it and it was going to benefit only other States.
Before the 1816 National banks, there were local banks, States banks. They printed
their own money, applied their own rules, economic systems weren't reliable, interstate trades
were risky...
President Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) left quite a print in US History. Great amount
of character. General in the Army, attorney, planter. He promised to respect the autonomy of
the States.
New tariffs in 1828. Southerners felt insecure (competition of other countries, slave
revolts...)
Calhoun: southerner. Born in SC, classical curriculum (studied law, became an
attorney). Supported federal government (national bank, protective tariffs). Vice-President
from 1825 to 1832 (JQ Adams + A. Jackson).
His stance on nullification grew from a personal dispute with Andrew Jackson. Rivalry
and bitterness emerged out of the Calhoun-Jackson relationship. The nullification crisis could
have been avoided, even though it shows the distinction between North and South.
Roots of the Nullification:
The States didn't surrender their sovereignty, they're at the base of the 179...
Constitution. Sovereignty is indivisible, can't be divided.
(To elect popular convention, and to cancel federal laws)
The amendment process: Calhoun says nullification can be justified because the
Constitution make possible for amendments to be added (and ¾ of the States need to agree on
that)
Radical theory: secession
South Carolina wanted to nullify the 1828 tariff law. The State was on the verge of
declaring secession.
Jackson answered that the US government was not a compact between the States, but a
compact between the people. He also led Congress to pass the 1833 Force Act (number of
laws) → Compromise Tariff Act of 1833 (gradual reduction of the 1828 Tariff over the next
20 years). South Carolina could import products at reasonable price, and the Union was still,
well, united.
Lecture 4: Clash #2, the American Civil War
1.
2.
The many sources of a traumatic conflict
The “Reconstruction” and its consequences
Only one civil war in the History of the country, contrary to numerous European
countries. It showed that the United States of America were not that united.
It revealed a paradox of the American Revolution: all men are created equal (as long as
they're white). It's a conflict that shaped much of the history of the USA in the 20th century.
Declaration of Independence: men created equal, endowed with certain unalienable
rights: Life, Liberty; Governments instituted amongst men, Right of People to alter or abolish
a Form of Government if it becomes destructive.
Equality incompatible with slavery. Slavery could only be tolerated as something
local, peculiar, an exception. 2 articles in the Constitution about slavery (see on the
Powerpoint). One about the fugitive slaves. The other about the number of Representatives
considering the number of slaves (slaves = 3/5 'normal' people) → the economic power was
important to that section. The C avoids using the terms such as “slaves”, “slavery”, “color”,
“negroes”...
Territorial expansion causes the Am Civil War. It was a priority in the early day of the
United States. Northwest Ordinance (Powerpoint) → slavery would not be possible in new
states, west of the 'official' US boundary as of 1787. Southerners disagreed.
Missouri Compromise: MS was a territory applying to be an American State, with
slavery legal. The Congress was split on the issue. The compromise was that Missouri would
become a state with slavery, but all future states north of the 46th parallel would be free States.
Thomas Jefferson was concerned about this Compromise (had nightmares).
Another compromise in 1850. Problem with California, who was split between the free
and slavery side. California was accepted as a complete free state, but Utah and New Mexico
were to decide themselves about the future of slavery in their state.
Problem: Dred Scott v Sandford (1857). Born in VA as a slave. 1833 → 1843, lived in
Illinois (free state). Dred Scott's master died, and Scott thought that, since he lived in IL, he
was to be free. The heir of the master said that Scott was his property.
Case brought to Supreme Court. The issue was to know if Dred Scott could sue in a
federal court = was he a citizen? Answer: no. He had no right to sue for his liberation.
Shocking decision that triggered a series of events, that gradually led to the Civil War.
1860: Presidential elections. The electoral map showed the division between pro and
anti slavery. Southerners were afraid, as Republicans said that slavery was a crime against
humanity, and Lincoln (a Republican) was elected.
Before he was sworn into office, seven Southern States declared secession, becoming
the Confederacy.
The Civil War really began in April 1861, when Southern troops attacked some place
in South Carolina. The war lasted four years. It was a very modern war, that resembled WWI
(gear, tactics, events, etc...).
(see map)
The North won. The unity of USA remained. The Federalists (their principles, their
beliefs) won. Popular sovereignty, only conception of American power. Legitimacy of Federal
Government (National Government first, State Government second). Emancipation
Proclamation (January 1st, 1863).
“Reconstruction” => Physical reconstruction (brutal war) + political reconstruction
(had to reunite two blocks together).
Reconstruction Era: 1865 → 1877. Time line on the PowerPoint. Amendments to
repair the Union, Civil Rights Act, a lot of laws in favor of emancipated slaves, and the
equality between ALL the US citizens. However, the Southern States were not immune to
racism in the post-Civil War period (Black Codes, early sign the Reconstruction would fail).
1872: Freedmen's Bureau abolished => defeat for the “Reconstructors”. 1875, the
Supreme Court invalidates the Civil Rights Act.
1877: Hayes-Tilden compromise. Hayes won the elections, but not clear winner (like
in 2000). Hayes (a Republican) said that if he was named President, he would remove
Reconstruction and retire Federal Troops from the South.
Plessy v Ferguson: Plessy was considered a black man (he was obviously white).
The Reconstruction still has a pejorative meaning in some parts of the USA. Carpet
Bagger: man from the North who quickly moved to the South after the Civil War, to pursue
wealth, political power... They were seen as opportunists.
14th amendment: all Americans are citizens of the USA, first and foremost, and
therefore their rights can't be restricted by the State where they live.
It operates a redistribution of power in the United States. The Art 1, Sec 8 was
reinforced by the 14th Amendment, the balance between Art 1 Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment
was in favor of the first.
Louisiana Act: separate but equal. Some people saw the risk of LA becoming a place
where Blacks and Whites would live side by side, have different opportunities... Citizens
committee was organized, and it was decided to test the Separate Car Act. It was tested with
Homer (wouh pinaise) Plessy, who was legally black but obviously white (nouvelle comédie
des Frères Wayans), as he was 1/8th black.
The train officers knew that when Plessy stepped into the train. They rejected him, the
committee sued them, and it was brought to Supreme Court.
The Louisiana Act was considered to be a violation of the 13th and 15th Amendment;
however, the Court decided to take the angle of the 14th Amendment, not to give victory to
Plessy.
The role of the Court was huge: they could delete any discrimination in the South.
The Court did not want to impose federal law on the States (remember the Civil War).
The Plessy vs Ferguson case started a huge era of “separate but equal” in the USA, the
discrimination and segregation, in education, housing, healthcare, employment, or even
drinking water.
It lasted until Rosa Parks did like Homer Plessy, when she sat on a front seat on a
segregated bus in Alabama. She was a member of the NAACP. The NAACP hired a
spokesman to explain their actions: Martin Luther King.
This began a battle (socially and judiciary) that ended with the Civil Rights Act of
1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, that repeated the 13th and 15th Amendments.
Lecture 5:New challenges for a New Era
Individual rights during the Gilded Age & WWI
I.
II.
The “New Era”
Three Supreme Court
The racism issue isn't the problem anymore since the Civil War, it's about the role of
the federal government in economy (welfare state or not, limit the powers of the
government...)
Gilded Age is what comes after the Reconstruction: 1870s, 1880s, 1890s, until WWI.
New American federalism, new distribution of power, between National Level
Government and State Level Government.
The 14th Amendment was quickly noticed by American lawyers: it was going to
change a lot of things. Thomas M Cooley, an optimist, thought it would create a new
American federalism, but that it wouldn't bring any problems or clashes, as the proper
exercise of the State power could not interfere with the federal power. He thought the Balance
of the Constitution would not be changed with the 14th Amendment.
The Slaughterhouse Cases of 1873: first time the 14th Amendment was used in a
lawsuit. The problem was not about race, but about sanitation.
It started in New Orleans, LA. It was not a good city to be a butcher. As the majority
of the city was under the level of water, the blood of animals would not go away, and there
were outbreak of cholera. The water of Mississippi was not safe to drink (with the blood and
all).
To protect the health of the city of NO, the State of Louisiana enacts “An Act to
Locate the Slaughter Houses”. Public slaughterhouses, where all butchers should go to kill
their meat. Problem: it had a cost for many butchers (butcher butcher butcher butcher
MUSHROOM MUSHROOM)
The butchers' lawyers declared it was a violation of the 14th Amendment (also of the
th
13 Amendment – slavery – but the Court did not take it seriously). The butchers won the
case, but the Court said that the 14th Amendment was not a tool to nullify state laws.
Plessy vs Ferguson (1896): the Court had the balance between State and Federal
governments in mind.
Lochner vs New York (1905): started with the Bakeshop Acts (sanitation and work
regulation for bakeries) in the State of New York in 1895. The bakeries were seen as not safe
enough for the workers (NSFW, en quelque sorte), and not clean enough for the clients.
But the bakers hired lawyers, and they deemed the Acts were a violation of the 14th
Amendment.
The Court declared that laws and acts were... (see PowerPoint). It struck the Bakeshop
Act, as it was declared contrary to the 14th Amendment. In short, they said that no trade or no
occupation should be threatened by politicians. In the end, they declared that basically, people
should be able to work 12, or 16 hours per day, if they wanted to.
Epilogue: with those three cases, the Court did not want to make the situation worse
for the States, and did not want to empower the federal government. They used tricky
reasoning and ruses to come to their ends.
Each of the cases reflect a social consensus.
The Slaughter-House Cases took place during the Reconstruction. Plessy vs Ferguson
was in the South (some African Americans thought that segregation was good, as it meant
protection). Lochner vs New York: rapid urbanization and industrialization.
Lecture 6:
A Constitutional “New Deal”:
the Birth of the American Welfare State
I.
II.
The New Deal: background
A constitutional New Deal?
No balance between between State and Federal Government. New Deal: made things
even worse for the States.
New Deal: umbrella term to talk about all the reform programs that were adopted
under President Roosevelt.
Roosevelt wanted to bring back confidence in the banking system. At the time, the
crisis pushed people to panic and withdraw their money from the banks → risk for the banks.
He also wanted to stabilize prices, at a standard rate, in order to encourage (merchants)
and farmers to produce again.
He wanted to provided federal assistance (money) to the poor.
This implied an unprecedented intervention of the Federal Government.
Food Stamp program (“Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program”). Started in 1939:
it was a $262 million program, and 20 million Americans benefited from it.
It was a response to the Great Depression, which started on October 24th 1929 = Black
Thursday (Krash).
New Deal: four key programs.
→ Agricultural Adjustment Act (1933): restricted agricultural production to let some parts
of the fields lie fallow (jachère), to raise the value of crops.
→ National Industrial Recovery Act (1933): made it compulsory for Am companies to pay
their workers a certain wage
→ Tennessee Valley Authority Act: created a public corporation to develop the Tennessee
Valley (building of bridges, dams, etc...)
→ Social Security Act: provide Americans with food, heat, unemployment benefits, pension
But was the New Deal constitutional/legal?
1936: Early setback #1. Supreme Court says no. The Fed Government doesn't have the right
to tax agricultural commodities.
For the Court, the Federal Act was going too far. These regulations should be taken by the
States.
1935: Early setback #2. Concerning poultry, and the sale of chicken unfit for human
consumption.
FD Roosevelt's response: the “court-packing plan”
FDR was reelected in 1936 (with 60% of the popular vote). Confidence, strength.
“Judicial Procedures Reform Bill” → possibility of replacing old judges of the Supreme Court
by younger ones (more tolerant, open, connected to society...)
FDR was the first one to use radio. “Fireside chats”.
1937: Is a State law that sets a minimum wage constitutional? Yes!
Social Security Act also judged constitutional.
The revolution of the American Supreme Court led to the birth of an American welfare state.
Epilogue for all this: Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Révisions civi US
→ Revoir opposition fédéralistes/anti-fédéralistes
→ Revoir biographie des grands acteurs, et des auteurs de cette période (origines, courants
politiques, etc...)
→ Contexte historique (adoption d'une Constitution, pb de financement)
→ Déjà idée de division du pouvoir en 3 (à l'époque, idée nouvelle, unique)
–
législatif (Sénat, Congrès)
–
exécutif (Président – aussi chef de toute l'administration)
–
judiciaire (à cette époque, peu discutée)
Deux idées de gouvernement:
–
gouvernement général (fédéral), le grand gagnant
–
13 gouvernements d'États