Alexa Malinowski
From 1801-1817, Republicans gained control of the white house with the
Jefferson and Madison presidencies. Traditionally Republicans were associated with
strict constructionism, however unforeseen situations forced them to moderately
break this pattern, causing federalists to frequently stray from their loose
constructionism policies in order to counter them.
For the duration of his presidency, Jefferson stayed true to strict
constructionism on his issues such as state rights and personal liberties. He was
adamant that state governments were to be mostly independent from the Federal
government. Jefferson’s plan to run his administration in a way that wouldn’t
infringe on individual state policies can be seen in his 1802 letter to a future cabinet
member, “Preservation to the states of those rights unquestionably remaining with
them…”(Doc A). This statement also reflects the ideas he and Madison had recorded
several years earlier in the Kentucky/Virginia resolutions, only now though did he
have the power to enact them. Jefferson also believed that federal government
didn’t have the power to limit personal liberties. These liberties are outlined in the
Bill of Rights, which was created by James Madison. A specific right Jefferson desired
to protect was freedom of religion. In 1808 was recorded telling a Presbyterian
Minister that government had, “…no authority… to direct religious exercises.”(Doc
B). After Jefferson’s presidency ended in 1809, Madison took over. He too addressed
certain issues in way that reflected strict constructionism. One of these ways was by
continuing Jefferson’s frugal financial debt way paid off and Madison also avoided
extra spending as seen in an 1817 veto to an Internal Improvements Bill. “An act to
set apart and pledge funds for the internal improvements…power…not expressing
given by the constitution.”(Doc H). Madison’s vetoing of the bill also reflected, that
like Jefferson, he didn’t feel confortable, exercising powers not specifically stated in
the Constitution.
During Jefferson and Madison’s presidencies, unforeseen situations and
unquestioned Republican dominance in politics, led them to make decisions that
reflected loose constructionism values. Many of the decisions had to do with foreign
policy. The violence between Britain and France during the Napoleonic Wars put
America in a tight position. American merchants couldn’t trade with one country
without facing hostilities with the other. In order to avoid further conflict, Jefferson
passed the Embargo act of 1807, which banned Americans from trading in foreign
ports. The public’s belief that this was an overstep of Federal authority was reflected
in Alexander Anderson’s political OGRABME cartoon. The act was eventually traded
in for the less harsh but still believed to be Federally over-reaching non-intercourse
act, an act that only banned trade with France and Britain. The enacting of these
policies were very much the opposite of other Republican legislation. They were for
the first time exercising powers not explicitly given to them in the Constitution. This
loose constructionism attitude was once again seen during the Louisiana Purchase
from Napoleon and Jefferson authorized Lewis and Clark expedition that followed
soon after. There were no guidelines on the acquisition of new territory, yet
Jefferson recognized the benefits on new territory and decided to accept the offer.
Madison also had moments during his presidency when he acted in a loose manner,
one case being the handling of the war of 1812. Instead of enacting appeasing and
conflict avoiding policies, Madison gave into the pressure of the War Hawks and
entered the war pulling all of America into a new conflict. By the end of their
presidencies, both men couldn’t deny the necessity of loose constructionism in
certain cases as Jefferson shared in a personal statement in 1816, “Opinions change
with change of circumstances.”(Doc G).
In response to expanding republican influence, Federalists began to
implement and advocate strict constructionism, while simultaneously countering
the loose constructionism polices they traditionally supported. Losing four
subsequent elections ended Federalist Political dominance and led them to look for
ways to limit the power of the government they no longer controlled. Among the
loudest protestors of the Embargo act were New England Merchant Federalists.
Federalists also opposed the American involvement in the War of 1812. They
disdainfully referred to it as Mr. Madison’s War. Unlike many other people, they
weren’t swept away by the cultural nationalism of the time and didn’t approve of
the Republican draft policy. Daniel Webster, a New Hampshire Federalist,
passionately argued against the bill in the House of Representatives in 1814, “Where
is it written in the Constitution…that you may take parents from their children.”(Doc
D). Federalist resentment of Republican policies led to extremist groups such as
Essex Junto; a group who believed that New England secession was the only way to
preserve true American Ideals. However, a more obvious example of Federalists
having strict constructionism sentiment was the Hartford Convention. In the
desperation to regain some control in government, they drew up a list of potential
amendments to the Constitution such as, “Congress shall not have power, without
concurrence of 2/3’s of both houses.”(Doc E). It was a last ditch effort to regain
political power, and it was ultimately unsuccessful.
From 1801-1817, neither the Republicans nor their rivals the Federalists
stay completely true to their respective strict and loose constructionism ideologies.