Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Martin Van Buren
View on Wikipedia
Martin Van Buren (/væn ˈbjʊərən/ van BYOO-rən; Dutch: Maarten van Buren [ˈmaːrtə(ɱ) vɑm ˈbyːrə(n)] ⓘ; December 5, 1782 – July 24, 1862) was the eighth president of the United States, serving from 1837 to 1841. A primary founder of the Democratic Party, Van Buren held a number of prominent offices. He served as New York's attorney general and U.S. senator, then briefly as the ninth governor of New York. After joining Andrew Jackson's administration, he served as the tenth United States secretary of state, minister to the United Kingdom, and ultimately, as the eighth vice president from 1833 to 1837, after being elected on Jackson's ticket in 1832. Van Buren won the presidency in 1836 against divided Whig opponents. He lost re-election in 1840, and failed to win the Democratic nomination in 1844. Later in his life, Van Buren re-emerged as an elder statesman and an anti-slavery leader who led the Free Soil Party ticket in the 1848 presidential election.
Key Information
He was born in Kinderhook, New York, where most residents were of Dutch descent and spoke Dutch as their primary language. Van Buren is the only president to have spoken English as a second language. He entered politics as a member of the Democratic-Republican Party, won a seat in the New York State Senate, and was elected to the United States Senate in 1821. As the leader of the Bucktails faction of the party, Van Buren established the political machine known as the Albany Regency. He ran successfully for governor of New York to support Andrew Jackson's candidacy in the 1828 presidential election but resigned shortly after Jackson was inaugurated so he could accept appointment as Jackson's secretary of state. In the cabinet, Van Buren was a key Jackson advisor and built the organizational structure for the coalescing Democratic Party. He ultimately resigned to help resolve the Petticoat affair and briefly served as ambassador to the United Kingdom. At Jackson's behest, the 1832 Democratic National Convention nominated Van Buren for vice president, and he took office after the Democratic ticket won the 1832 presidential election.
With Jackson's strong support and the organizational strength of the Democratic Party, Van Buren successfully ran for president in the 1836 presidential election. However, his popularity soon eroded because of his response to the Panic of 1837, which centered on his Independent Treasury system, a plan under which the federal government of the United States would store its funds in vaults rather than in banks. More conservative Democrats and Whigs in Congress ultimately delayed Van Buren's plan from being implemented until 1840. His presidency was further marred by the costly Second Seminole War and his refusal to admit Texas to the Union as a slave state. In 1840, he lost his re-election bid to William Henry Harrison. While Van Buren is praised for anti-slavery stances, in historical rankings, historians and political scientists often rank him as an average or below-average U.S. president, due to his handling of the Panic of 1837.
He was initially the leading candidate for the Democratic Party's nomination again in 1844, but his continued opposition to the annexation of Texas angered Southern Democrats, leading to the nomination of James K. Polk. Growing opposed to slavery, Van Buren was the newly formed Free Soil Party's presidential nominee in 1848, and his candidacy helped Whig nominee Zachary Taylor defeat Democrat Lewis Cass. Worried about sectional tensions, Van Buren returned to the Democratic Party after 1848 but was disappointed with the pro-southern presidencies of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan. During the American Civil War, Van Buren was a War Democrat who supported the policies of President Abraham Lincoln, a Republican. He died of asthma at his home in Kinderhook in 1862, aged 79.
Early life and education
[edit]

Martin Van Buren was born on December 5, 1782, in Kinderhook, New York,[5] His father, Abraham Van Buren, was a descendant of Cornelis Maessen, a native of Buurmalsen, Netherlands, who had emigrated to New Netherland in 1631 and purchased a plot of land on Manhattan Island.[6][7] He was the first President born after the Declaration of Independence and the last born prior to British ratification of the terms of the 1783 Treaty of Paris that ended the American Revolutionary War; as a result, Van Buren was the last President to be born, (but not last to serve) a 'jus soli' British Subject by birth in one of the Thirteen Colonies. Abraham Van Buren had been a Patriot during the American Revolution,[8][9] and he later joined the Democratic-Republican Party.[10] He owned an inn and tavern in Kinderhook and served as Kinderhook's town clerk for several years. In 1776, he married Maria Hoes (or Goes) Van Alen (1746–1818) in the town of Kinderhook, also of Dutch extraction and the widow of Johannes Van Alen (1744-c. 1773). She had three children from her first marriage, including future U.S. Representative James I. Van Alen. Her second marriage produced five children, of which Martin was the third.[11]
Van Buren received a basic education at the village schoolhouse, and briefly studied Latin at the Kinderhook Academy and at Washington Seminary in Claverack.[12][13] Van Buren had entirely Dutch ancestry and was raised speaking primarily Dutch; he learned English while attending school[14] and is the only president of the United States whose first language was not English.[15] Also during his childhood, Van Buren learned at his father's inn how to interact with people from varied ethnic, income, and societal groups, which he used to his advantage as a political organizer.[16] His formal education ended in 1796, when he began reading law at the office of Peter Silvester and his son Francis.[17]
Van Buren, at 5 feet 6 inches (1.68 m) tall, was small in stature, and affectionately nicknamed "Little Van".[18] He was also called the "Red Fox" due to his "bushy reddish sideburns, striking forehead and prominent nose".[19] When he began his legal studies he wore rough, homespun clothing,[20] causing the Silvesters to admonish him to pay greater heed to his clothing and personal appearance as an aspiring lawyer. He accepted their advice, and subsequently emulated the Silvesters' clothing, appearance, bearing, and conduct.[21][22] The lessons he learned from the Silvesters were reflected in his career as a lawyer and politician, in which Van Buren was known for his amiability and fastidious appearance.[23] Despite Kinderhook's strong affiliation with the Federalist Party, of which the Silvesters were also strong supporters, Van Buren adopted his father's Democratic-Republican leanings.[24] The Silvesters and Democratic-Republican political figure John Peter Van Ness suggested that Van Buren's political leanings constrained him to complete his education with a Democratic-Republican attorney, so he spent a final year of apprenticeship in the New York City office of John Van Ness's brother William P. Van Ness, a political lieutenant of Aaron Burr.[25] Van Ness introduced Van Buren to the intricacies of New York state politics, and Van Buren observed Burr's battles for control of the state Democratic-Republican party against George Clinton and Robert R. Livingston.[26] He returned to Kinderhook in 1803, after his admission to the New York bar.[27]

Van Buren married Hannah Hoes in Catskill, New York, on February 21, 1807, when he was 24 years old and she was 23. She was his childhood sweetheart and a daughter of his maternal first cousin, Johannes Dircksen Hoes.[28] She grew up in Valatie, and like Van Buren her home life was primarily Dutch; she spoke Dutch as her first language, and spoke English with a marked accent.[29] The couple had six children, four of whom lived to adulthood: Abraham (1807–1873), unnamed daughter (stillborn around 1809), John (1810–1866), Martin Jr. (1812–1855), Winfield Scott (born and died in 1814), and Smith Thompson (1817–1876).[30] Hannah contracted tuberculosis, and died in Kinderhook on February 5, 1819.[31] Martin Van Buren never remarried.[32]
Early political career
[edit]
Upon returning to Kinderhook in 1803, Van Buren formed a law partnership with his half-brother, James Van Alen, and became financially secure enough to increase his focus on politics.[33] Van Buren had been active in politics from age 18, if not before. In 1801, he attended a Democratic-Republican Party convention in Troy, New York, where he worked successfully to secure for John Peter Van Ness the party nomination in a special election for the 6th Congressional District seat.[34] Upon returning to Kinderhook, Van Buren broke with the Burr faction, becoming an ally of both DeWitt Clinton and Daniel D. Tompkins. After the faction led by Clinton and Tompkins dominated the 1807 elections, Van Buren was appointed Surrogate of Columbia County, New York.[35] Seeking a better base for his political and legal career, Van Buren and his family moved to the town of Hudson, the seat of Columbia County, in 1808.[36] Van Buren's legal practice continued to flourish, and he traveled all over the state to represent various clients.[37]
In 1812, Van Buren won his party's nomination for a seat in the New York State Senate. Though several Democratic-Republicans, including John Peter Van Ness, joined with the Federalists to oppose his candidacy, Van Buren won election to the state senate in mid-1812.[38] Later in the year, the United States entered the War of 1812 against Great Britain, while Clinton launched an unsuccessful bid to defeat President James Madison in the 1812 presidential election. After the election, Van Buren became suspicious that Clinton was working with the Federalist Party, and he broke from his former political ally.[39]
During the War of 1812, Van Buren worked with Clinton, Governor Tompkins, and Ambrose Spencer to support the Madison administration's prosecution of the war.[40] In addition, he was a special judge advocate appointed to serve as a prosecutor of William Hull during Hull's court-martial following the surrender of Detroit.[41][42] Anticipating another military campaign, he collaborated with Winfield Scott on ways to reorganize the New York Militia in the winter of 1814–1815, but the end of the war halted their work in early 1815.[43] Van Buren was so favorably impressed by Scott that he named his fourth son after him.[44] Van Buren's strong support for the war boosted his standing, and in 1815, he was elected New York Attorney General. Van Buren moved from Hudson to the state capital of Albany, where he established a legal partnership with Benjamin Butler,[45] and shared a house with political ally Roger Skinner.[46] In 1816, Van Buren won re-election to the state senate, and he continued to simultaneously serve as attorney general.[47] In 1819, he played an active part in prosecuting the accused murderers of Richard Jennings, the first murder-for-hire case in the state of New York.[48]
Albany Regency
[edit]After Tompkins was elected as vice president in the 1816 presidential election, Clinton defeated Van Buren's preferred candidate, Peter Buell Porter, in the 1817 New York gubernatorial election.[49] Clinton threw his influence behind the construction of the Erie Canal, an ambitious project designed to connect Lake Erie to the Atlantic Ocean.[50] Though many of Van Buren's allies urged him to block Clinton's canal bill, Van Buren believed the canal would benefit the state. His support for the bill helped it win approval from the New York legislature.[51] Despite his support for the Erie Canal, Van Buren became the leader of an anti-Clintonian faction in New York known as the "Bucktails".[52]
The Bucktails succeeded in emphasizing party loyalty. Through his use of patronage, loyal newspapers, and connections with local party officials and leaders, Van Buren established what became known as the "Albany Regency", a political machine that emerged as an important factor in New York politics.[53] The Regency relied on a coalition of small farmers, but also enjoyed support from the Tammany Hall machine in New York City.[54] During this era, Van Buren largely determined Tammany Hall's political policy for New York's Democratic-Republicans.[55]
A New York state referendum that expanded state voting rights to all white men in 1821, and which further increased the power of Tammany Hall, was guided by Van Buren.[56] Although Governor Clinton remained in office until late 1822, Van Buren emerged as the leader of the state's Democratic-Republicans after the 1820 elections.[57] Van Buren was a member of the 1820 state constitutional convention, where he favored expanded voting rights, but opposed universal suffrage and tried to maintain property requirements for voting.[58]
Entry into national politics
[edit]In February 1821, the state legislature elected Van Buren to represent New York in the United States Senate.[59] Van Buren arrived in Washington during the "Era of Good Feelings", a period in which partisan distinctions at the national level had faded.[60] Van Buren quickly became a prominent figure in Washington, D.C., befriending Secretary of the Treasury William H. Crawford, among others.[61] Though not an exceptional orator, Van Buren frequently spoke on the Senate floor, usually after extensively researching the subject at hand. Despite his commitments as a father and state party leader, Van Buren remained closely engaged in his legislative duties, and during his time in the Senate he was a member of the Senate Finance Committee and served as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.[62][63] As he gained renown, Van Buren earned monikers like "Little Magician" and "Sly Fox".[64]
Van Buren chose to back Crawford over John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, and Henry Clay in the presidential election of 1824.[65] Crawford shared Van Buren's affinity for Jeffersonian principles of states' rights and limited government, and Van Buren believed that Crawford was the ideal figure to lead a coalition of New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia's "Richmond Junto".[66] Van Buren's support for Crawford aroused strong opposition in New York in the form of the People's party, which drew support from Clintonians, Federalists, and others opposed to Van Buren.[67] Nonetheless, Van Buren helped Crawford win the Democratic-Republican party's presidential nomination at the February 1824 congressional nominating caucus.[68] The other Democratic-Republican candidates in the race refused to accept the poorly attended caucus's decision, and as the Federalist Party had all but ceased to function as a national party, the 1824 campaign became a competition among four candidates of the same party. Though Crawford suffered a severe stroke that left him in poor health, Van Buren continued to support his chosen candidate.[69] In May 1824, Van Buren met with 81-year-old former President Thomas Jefferson in an attempt to bolster Crawford's candidacy, and though he was unsuccessful in gaining a public endorsement for Crawford, he nonetheless cherished the chance to meet with his political hero.[70]
The 1824 elections dealt a severe blow to the Albany Regency, as Clinton returned to the governorship with the support of the People's party. By the time the state legislature convened to choose the state's presidential electors, results from other states had made it clear that no individual would win a majority of the electoral vote, necessitating a contingent election in the United States House of Representatives.[71] While Adams and Jackson finished in the top three and were eligible for selection in the contingent election, New York's electors would help determine whether Clay or Crawford would finish third.[72] Though most of the state's electoral votes went to Adams, Crawford won one more electoral vote than Clay in the state, and Clay's defeat in Louisiana left Crawford in third place.[73] With Crawford still in the running, Van Buren lobbied members of the House to support him.[74] He hoped to engineer a Crawford victory on the second ballot of the contingent election, but Adams won on the first ballot with the help of Clay and Stephen Van Rensselaer, a Congressman from New York. Despite his close ties with Van Buren, Van Rensselaer cast his vote for Adams, thus giving Adams a narrow majority of New York's delegation and a victory in the contingent election.[75]
After the House contest, Van Buren shrewdly kept out of the controversy which followed, and began looking forward to 1828. Jackson was angered to see the presidency go to Adams despite Jackson having won more popular votes than Adams had, and he eagerly looked forward to a rematch.[76] Jackson's supporters accused Adams and Clay of having made a "corrupt bargain" in which Clay helped Adams win the contingent election in return for Clay's appointment as Secretary of State.[77] Van Buren was always courteous in his treatment of opponents and showed no bitterness toward either Adams or Clay, and he voted to confirm Clay's nomination to the cabinet.[78] At the same time, Van Buren opposed the Adams-Clay plans for internal improvements like roads and canals and declined to support U.S. participation in the Congress of Panama.[79] Van Buren considered Adams's proposals to represent a return to the Hamiltonian economic model favored by Federalists, which he strongly opposed.[80] Despite his opposition to Adams's public policies, Van Buren easily secured re-election in his divided home state in 1827.[81]
1828 elections
[edit]Van Buren's overarching goal at the national level was to restore a two-party system with party cleavages based on philosophical differences, and he viewed the old divide between Federalists and Democratic-Republicans as beneficial to the nation.[82] Van Buren believed that these national parties helped ensure that elections were decided on national, rather than sectional or local, issues; as he put it, "party attachment in former times furnished a complete antidote for sectional prejudices". After the 1824 election, Van Buren was initially somewhat skeptical of Jackson, who had not taken strong positions on most policy issues. Nonetheless, he settled on Jackson as the one candidate who could beat Adams in the 1828 presidential election, and he worked to bring Crawford's former backers into line behind Jackson.[citation needed]
He also forged alliances with other members of Congress opposed to Adams, including Vice President John C. Calhoun, Senator Thomas Hart Benton, and Senator John Randolph.[83] Seeking to solidify his standing in New York and bolster Jackson's campaign, Van Buren helped arrange the passage of the Tariff of 1828, which opponents labeled as the "Tariff of Abominations". The tariff was intended to protect northern and western agricultural products from foreign competition, but the resulting tax on imports cut into the profits of New England businessmen, who imported raw materials including iron to make into finished goods for subsequent resale, as well as finished goods including clothing for distribution and resale throughout the United States. The tariff also raised the cost of living in the South, because Southern states had little manufacturing capacity, which required them to export raw materials including cotton or sell them to Northern manufacturers, then import higher-priced finished goods or purchase them from the North. The tariff thus satisfied many who sought protection from foreign competition, but angered Southern cotton interests and New England importers and manufacturers.[84] Because Van Buren believed the South would never support Adams, and New England would never support Jackson, he was willing to alienate both regions through passage of the tariff.[85]
Meanwhile, Clinton's death from a heart attack in 1828 dramatically shook up the politics of Van Buren's home state, while the Anti-Masonic Party emerged as an increasingly important factor.[86] After some initial reluctance, Van Buren chose to run for Governor of New York in the 1828 election.[87] Hoping that a Jackson victory would lead to his elevation to Secretary of State or Secretary of the Treasury, Van Buren chose Enos T. Throop as his running mate and preferred successor.[88] Van Buren's candidacy was aided by the split between supporters of Adams, who had adopted the label of National Republicans, and the Anti-Masonic Party.[89]
Reflecting his public association with Jackson, Van Buren accepted the gubernatorial nomination on a ticket that called itself "Jacksonian-Democrat".[90] He campaigned on local as well as national issues, emphasizing his opposition to the policies of the Adams administration.[91] Van Buren ran ahead of Jackson, winning the state by 30,000 votes compared to a margin of 5,000 for Jackson.[92] Nationally, Jackson defeated Adams by a wide margin, winning nearly every state outside of New England.[93] After the election, Van Buren resigned from the Senate to start his term as governor, which began on January 1, 1829.[94] While his term as governor was short, he did manage to pass the Bank Safety Fund Law, an early form of deposit insurance, through the legislature.[95] He also appointed several key supporters, including William L. Marcy and Silas Wright, to important state positions.[96]
Jackson administration (1829–1837)
[edit]Secretary of State
[edit]
In February 1829, Jackson wrote to Van Buren to ask him to become Secretary of State.[97] Van Buren quickly agreed, and he resigned as governor the following month; his tenure of forty-three days is the shortest of any Governor of New York.[98] No serious diplomatic crises arose during Van Buren's tenure as Secretary of State, but he achieved various successes, such as settling long-standing claims against France and winning reparations for property that had been seized during the Napoleonic Wars. He reached an agreement with the British to open trade with the British West Indies colonies and concluded a treaty with the Ottoman Empire that gained American merchants access to the Black Sea. Items on which he did not achieve success included settling the Maine-New Brunswick boundary dispute with Great Britain, gaining settlement of the U.S. claim to the Oregon Country, concluding a commercial treaty with Russia, and persuading Mexico to sell Texas.[99][100]
In addition to his foreign policy duties, Van Buren quickly emerged as an important advisor to Jackson on major domestic issues like the tariff and internal improvements.[101] The Secretary of State was instrumental in convincing Jackson to issue the Maysville Road veto, which both reaffirmed limited government principles and also helped prevent the construction of infrastructure projects that could potentially compete with New York's Erie Canal.[102] He also became involved in a power struggle with Calhoun over appointments and other issues, including the Petticoat Affair.[103] The Petticoat Affair arose because Peggy Eaton, wife of Secretary of War John H. Eaton, was ostracized by the other cabinet wives due to the circumstances of her marriage.[104][105]
Led by Floride Calhoun, wife of Vice President John Calhoun, the other cabinet wives refused to pay courtesy calls to the Eatons, receive them as visitors, or invite them to social events.[106] As a widower, Van Buren was unaffected by the position of the cabinet wives.[107] Van Buren initially sought to mend the divide in the cabinet, but most of the leading citizens in Washington continued to snub the Eatons.[108] Jackson was close to Eaton, and he came to the conclusion that the allegations against Eaton arose from a plot against his administration led by Henry Clay.[109] The Petticoat Affair, combined with a contentious debate over the tariff and Calhoun's decade-old criticisms of Jackson's actions in the First Seminole War, contributed to a split between Jackson and Calhoun.[110] As the debate over the tariff and the proposed ability of South Carolina to nullify federal law consumed Washington, Van Buren, not Calhoun, increasingly emerged as Jackson's likely successor.[111]
The Petticoat affair was finally resolved when Van Buren offered to resign. In April 1831, Jackson accepted and reorganized his cabinet by asking for the resignations of the anti-Eaton cabinet members.[112] Postmaster General William T. Barry, who had sided with the Eatons in the Petticoat Affair, was the lone cabinet member to remain in office.[113] The cabinet reorganization removed Calhoun's allies from the Jackson administration, and Van Buren had a major role in shaping the new cabinet.[114] After leaving office, Van Buren continued to play a part in the Kitchen Cabinet, Jackson's informal circle of advisors.[115]
Ambassador to Britain and vice presidency
[edit]
In August 1831, Jackson gave Van Buren a recess appointment as the ambassador to Britain, and Van Buren arrived in London in September.[116] He was cordially received, but in February 1832, shortly after his 49th birthday, he learned that the Senate had rejected his nomination.[117] The rejection of Van Buren was essentially the work of Calhoun.[118] When the vote on Van Buren's nomination was taken, enough pro-Calhoun Jacksonians refrained from voting to produce a tie, which allowed Calhoun to cast the deciding vote against Van Buren.[119]
Calhoun was elated, convinced that he had ended Van Buren's career. "It will kill him dead, sir, kill him dead. He will never kick, sir, never kick", Calhoun exclaimed to a friend.[120] Calhoun's move backfired; by making Van Buren appear the victim of petty politics, Calhoun raised Van Buren in both Jackson's regard and the esteem of others in the Democratic Party. Far from ending Van Buren's career, Calhoun's action gave greater impetus to Van Buren's candidacy for vice president.[121]
Seeking to ensure that Van Buren would replace Calhoun as his running mate, Jackson had arranged for a national convention of his supporters.[122] The May 1832 Democratic National Convention subsequently nominated Van Buren to serve as the party's vice presidential nominee.[123] Van Buren won the nomination over Philip P. Barbour (Calhoun's favored candidate) and Richard Mentor Johnson due to the support of Jackson and the strength of the Albany Regency.[124] Upon Van Buren's return from Europe in July 1832, he became involved in the Bank War, a struggle over the renewal of the charter of the Second Bank of the United States.[125]
Van Buren had long been distrustful of banks, and he viewed the bank as an extension of the Hamiltonian economic program, so he supported Jackson's veto of the bank's re-charter.[126] Henry Clay, the presidential nominee of the National Republicans, made the struggle over the bank the key issue of the presidential election of 1832.[127] The Jackson–Van Buren ticket won the 1832 election by a landslide,[128] and Van Buren took office as the eighth Vice President of the United States on March 4, 1833, at the age of 50.[129] During the Nullification Crisis, Van Buren counseled Jackson to pursue a policy of conciliation with South Carolina leaders.[130] He played little direct role in the passage of the Tariff of 1833, but he quietly hoped that the tariff would help bring an end to the Nullification Crisis, which it did.[131]
As vice president, Van Buren continued to be one of Jackson's primary advisors and confidants, and accompanied Jackson on his tour of the northeastern United States in 1833.[132] Jackson's struggle with the Second Bank of the United States continued, as the president sought to remove federal funds from the bank.[133] Though initially apprehensive of the removal due to congressional support for the bank, Van Buren eventually came to support Jackson's policy.[134] He also helped undermine a fledgling alliance between Jackson and Daniel Webster, a senator from Massachusetts who could have potentially threatened Van Buren's project to create two parties separated by policy differences rather than personalities.[135] During Jackson's second term, the president's supporters began to refer to themselves as members of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, those opposed to Jackson, including Clay's National Republicans, followers of Calhoun and Webster, and many members of the Anti-Masonic Party, coalesced into the Whig Party.[136]
Presidential election of 1836
[edit]President Andrew Jackson declined to seek another term in the 1836 presidential election, but he remained influential within the Democratic Party as his second term came to an end. Jackson was determined to help elect Van Buren in 1836 so that the latter could continue the Jackson administration's policies. The two men—the charismatic "Old Hickory" and the efficient "Sly Fox"—had entirely different personalities but had become an effective team in eight years in office together.[137] With Jackson's support, Van Buren won the presidential nomination of the 1835 Democratic National Convention without opposition.[138] Two names were put forward for the vice-presidential nomination: Representative Richard M. Johnson of Kentucky, and former Senator William Cabell Rives of Virginia. Southern Democrats, and Van Buren himself, strongly preferred Rives. Jackson, on the other hand, strongly preferred Johnson. Again, Jackson's considerable influence prevailed, and Johnson received the required two-thirds vote after New York Senator Silas Wright prevailed upon non-delegate Edward Rucker to cast the 15 votes of the absent Tennessee delegation in Johnson's favor.[139][138]

Van Buren's competitors in the election of 1836 were three members of the Whig Party, which remained a loose coalition bound by mutual opposition to Jackson's anti-bank policies. Lacking the party unity or organizational strength to field a single ticket or define a single platform,[139] the Whigs ran several regional candidates in hopes of sending the election to the House of Representatives.[140] The three candidates were Hugh Lawson White of Tennessee, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, and William Henry Harrison of Indiana. Besides endorsing internal improvements and a national bank, the Whigs tried to tie Democrats to abolitionism and sectional tension, and attacked Jackson for "acts of aggression and usurpation of power".[141]
Southern voters represented the biggest potential impediment to Van Buren's quest for the presidency, as many were apprehensive at the prospect of a Northern president.[142] Van Buren moved to obtain their support by assuring them that he opposed abolitionism and supported maintaining slavery in states where it already existed.[143] To demonstrate consistency regarding his opinions on slavery, Van Buren cast the tie-breaking Senate vote for a bill to subject abolitionist mail to state laws, thus ensuring that its circulation would be prohibited in the South.[144] Van Buren considered slavery to be immoral but sanctioned by the Constitution.[145]
Van Buren won the election with 764,198 popular votes, 50.9% of the total, and 170 electoral votes. Harrison led the Whigs with 73 electoral votes, White receiving 26, and Webster 14.[141] Willie Person Mangum received South Carolina's 11 electoral votes, which were awarded by the state legislature.[146] Van Buren's victory resulted from a combination of his attractive political and personal qualities, Jackson's popularity and endorsement, the organizational power of the Democratic Party, and the inability of the Whig Party to muster an effective candidate and campaign.[147] Despite their lack of organization, the Whigs came close to their goal of forcing the election into the House of Representatives, with Van Buren winning the decisive state of Pennsylvania by a little over 4,000 voters, indicating the fragility of the voting coalition that Van Buren had inherited from Jackson.[147] Virginia's presidential electors voted for Van Buren for president, but voted for William Smith for vice president, leaving Johnson one electoral vote short of election.[148] In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment, the Senate elected Johnson vice president in a contingent vote.[149]
The election of 1836 marked an important turning point in American political history because it saw the establishment of the Second Party System. In the early 1830s, the political party structure was still changing rapidly, and factional and personal leaders continued to play a major role in politics. By the end of the campaign of 1836, the new Second Party System was almost complete, as nearly every faction had been absorbed by either the Democrats or the Whigs.[150]
Presidency (1837–1841)
[edit]| Part of a series on |
| Liberalism in the United States |
|---|
Cabinet
[edit]
Martin Van Buren was sworn in as the eighth President of the United States on March 4, 1837. He retained much of Jackson's cabinet and lower-level appointees, as he hoped that the retention of Jackson's appointees would stop Whig momentum in the South and restore confidence in the Democrats as a party of sectional unity.[151] The cabinet holdovers represented the different regions of the country: Secretary of the Treasury Levi Woodbury came from New England, Attorney General Benjamin Franklin Butler and Secretary of the Navy Mahlon Dickerson hailed from New York and New Jersey, respectively, Secretary of State John Forsyth of Georgia represented the South, and Postmaster General Amos Kendall of Kentucky represented the West.[citation needed]
For the lone open position of Secretary of War, Van Buren first approached William Cabell Rives, who had sought the vice presidency in 1836. After Rives declined to join the cabinet, Van Buren appointed Joel Roberts Poinsett, a South Carolinian who had opposed secession during the Nullification Crisis. Van Buren's cabinet choices were criticized by Pennsylvanians such as James Buchanan, who argued that their state deserved a cabinet position as well as some Democrats who argued that Van Buren should have used his patronage powers to augment his power. However, Van Buren saw value in avoiding contentious patronage battles, and his decision to retain Jackson's cabinet made it clear that he intended to continue the policies of his predecessor. Additionally, Van Buren had helped select Jackson's cabinet appointees and enjoyed strong working relationships with them.[152]
Van Buren held regular formal cabinet meetings and discontinued the informal gatherings of advisors that had attracted so much attention during Jackson's presidency. He solicited advice from department heads, tolerated open and even frank exchanges between cabinet members, perceiving himself as "a mediator, and to some extent an umpire between the conflicting opinions" of his counselors. Such detachment allowed the president to reserve judgment and protect his prerogative for making final decisions. These open discussions gave cabinet members a sense of participation and made them feel part of a functioning entity, rather than isolated executive agents.[153] Van Buren was closely involved in foreign affairs and matters pertaining to the Treasury Department; but the Post Office, War Department, and Navy Department had significant autonomy under their respective cabinet secretaries.[154]
Panic of 1837
[edit]
When Van Buren entered office, the nation's economic health had taken a turn for the worse and the prosperity of the early 1830s was over. Two months into his presidency, on May 10, 1837, some important state banks in New York, running out of hard currency reserves, refused to convert paper money into gold or silver, and other financial institutions throughout the nation quickly followed suit. This financial crisis would become known as the Panic of 1837.[155] The Panic was followed by a five-year depression in which banks failed and unemployment reached record highs.[156]
Van Buren blamed the economic collapse on greedy American and foreign business and financial institutions, as well as the over-extension of credit by U.S. banks. Whig leaders in Congress blamed the Democrats, along with Andrew Jackson's economic policies,[155] specifically his 1836 Specie Circular. Cries of "rescind the circular!" went up and former president Jackson sent word to Van Buren asking him not to rescind the order, believing that it had to be given enough time to work. Others, like Nicholas Biddle, believed that Jackson's dismantling of the Bank of the United States was directly responsible for the irresponsible creation of paper money by the state banks which had precipitated this panic.[157] The Panic of 1837 loomed large over the 1838 election cycle, as the carryover effects of the economic downturn led to Whig gains in both the U.S. House and Senate. The state elections in 1837 and 1838 were also disastrous for the Democrats,[158] and the partial economic recovery in 1838 was offset by a second commercial crisis later that year.[159]
To address the crisis, the Whigs proposed rechartering the national bank. The president countered by proposing the establishment of an independent U.S. treasury, which he contended would take the politics out of the nation's money supply. Under the plan, the government would hold its money in gold or silver, and would be restricted from printing paper money at will; both measures were designed to prevent inflation.[160] The plan would permanently separate the government from private banks by storing government funds in government vaults rather than in private banks.[161] Van Buren announced his proposal in September 1837,[155] but an alliance of conservative Democrats and Whigs prevented it from becoming law until 1840.[162] As the debate continued, conservative Democrats like Rives defected to the Whig Party, which itself grew more unified in its opposition to Van Buren.[163] The Whigs would abolish the Independent Treasury system in 1841, but it was revived in 1846, and remained in place until the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.[164] More important for Van Buren's immediate future, the depression would be a major issue in his upcoming re-election campaign.[155]
Indian removal
[edit]Federal policy under Jackson had sought to move Indian tribes to lands west of the Mississippi River through the Indian Removal Act of 1830, and the federal government negotiated 19 treaties with Indian tribes during Van Buren's presidency.[165] The 1835 Treaty of New Echota signed by government officials and representatives of the Cherokee tribe had established terms under which the Cherokees ceded their territory in the southeast and agreed to move west to Oklahoma. In 1838, Van Buren directed General Winfield Scott to forcibly move all those who had not yet complied with the treaty.[166]
The Cherokees were herded violently into internment camps where they were kept for the summer of 1838. The actual transportation west was delayed by intense heat and drought, but in the fall, the Cherokee reluctantly agreed to transport themselves west.[167][168] Some 20,000 people were relocated against their will during the Cherokee removal, part of the Trail of Tears.[169] Ralph Waldo Emerson, who would go on to become America's foremost man of letters, wrote Van Buren a letter[170] protesting his treatment of the Cherokee.[171]
An estimated 4,000 Cherokee died during the Trail of Tears. Entire Indian nations were relocated, with some losing as much as half their populations. Van Buren claimed that America was "perhaps in the beginning unjustifiable aggressors" toward the Indians, but later became the "guardians". He told Congress that a "mixed occupancy of the same territory by the white and red man is incompatible with the safety or happiness of either", and also claimed the Cherokee had not protested their removal.[172]

President Jackson used the army to force Seminole Indians in Florida to move to the west. Many did surrender but they then escaped from detention camps. In December 1837, in the Second Seminole War the army launched a massive offensive, leading to the Battle of Lake Okeechobee and a new phase of attrition. Realizing it was almost impossible to remove the remaining Seminoles from Florida, the administration negotiated a compromise allowing them to remain in southwest Florida.[173]
Texas
[edit]Just before leaving office in March 1837, Andrew Jackson extended diplomatic recognition to the Republic of Texas, which had won independence from Mexico in the Texas Revolution. By suggesting the prospect of quick annexation, Jackson raised the danger of war with Mexico and heightened sectional tensions at home. New England abolitionists charged that there was a "slaveholding conspiracy to acquire Texas", and Daniel Webster eloquently denounced annexation.[174] Many Southern leaders, meanwhile, strongly desired the expansion of slave-holding territory in the United States.[175]
Boldly reversing Jackson's policies, Van Buren sought peace abroad and harmony at home. He proposed a diplomatic solution to a long-standing financial dispute between American citizens and the Mexican government, rejecting Jackson's threat to settle it by force.[174] Likewise, when the Texas minister at Washington, D.C., proposed annexation to the administration in August 1837, he was told that the proposition could not be entertained. Constitutional scruples and fear of war with Mexico were the reasons given for the rejection,[176] but concern that it would precipitate a clash over the extension of slavery undoubtedly influenced Van Buren and continued to be the chief obstacle to annexation.[177] Northern and Southern Democrats followed an unspoken rule: Northerners helped quash anti-slavery proposals and Southerners refrained from agitating for the annexation of Texas.[175] Texas withdrew the annexation offer in 1838.[176]
Border violence with Canada
[edit]
Caroline episode
[edit]British subjects in Lower Canada (now Quebec) and Upper Canada (now Ontario) rose in rebellion in 1837 and 1838, protesting their lack of responsible government. While the initial insurrection in Upper Canada ended quickly (following the December 1837 Battle of Montgomery's Tavern), many of the rebels fled across the Niagara River into New York, and Upper Canadian rebel leader William Lyon Mackenzie began recruiting volunteers in Buffalo.[178] Mackenzie declared the establishment of the Republic of Canada and put into motion a plan whereby volunteers would invade Upper Canada from Navy Island on the Canadian side of the Niagara River. Several hundred volunteers traveled to Navy Island in the weeks that followed. They procured the steamboat Caroline to deliver supplies to Navy Island from Fort Schlosser.[178] Seeking to deter an imminent invasion, British forces crossed to the American bank of the river in late December 1837, and they burned and sank the Caroline. In the melee, one American was killed and others were wounded.[179]
Considerable sentiment arose within the United States to declare war, and a British ship was burned in revenge.[180] Van Buren, looking to avoid a war with Great Britain, sent General Winfield Scott to the Canada–United States border with large discretionary powers for its protection and its peace.[181] Scott impressed upon American citizens the need for a peaceful resolution to the crisis, and made it clear that the U.S. government would not support adventuresome Americans attacking the British. In early January 1838, the president proclaimed neutrality in the Canadian independence issue,[182] a declaration which Congress endorsed by passing a neutrality law designed to discourage the participation of American citizens in foreign conflicts.[180]
Patriot War of 1837–1838
[edit]
During the Canadian rebellions, Charles Duncombe and Robert Nelson created an armed secret society in Vermont, the Hunters' Lodge. It carried out several small attacks in Upper Canada between December 1837 and December 1838, collectively known as the Patriot War. Washington responded using the Neutrality Act. It prosecuted the leaders and actively deterred Americans from subversive activities abroad. In the long term, Van Buren's opposition to the Patriot War contributed to the construction of healthy Anglo-American and Canada–United States relations. It also led, more immediately, to a backlash among citizens regarding the seeming overreach of federal authority,[183] which hurt congressional Democrats in the 1838 midterm elections.[citation needed]
Northern Maine: the Aroostook "War"
[edit]A new crisis surfaced in late 1838, in the disputed territory on the thinly settled Maine–New Brunswick frontier. Americans were settling on long-disputed land claimed by the United States and the United Kingdom. The British considered possession of the area vital to the defense of Canada.[184] Both American and New Brunswick lumberjacks cut timber in the disputed territory during the winter of 1838–1839. On December 29, New Brunswick lumbermen were spotted cutting down trees on an American estate near the Aroostook River. When American woodcutters rushed to stand guard, a shouting match, known as the Battle of Caribou, ensued. Tensions escalated with officials from both Maine and New Brunswick arresting each other's citizens.[185] British troops began gathering along the Saint John River. Maine Governor John Fairfield mobilized the state militia.[citation needed]
The American press clamored for war; "Maine and her soil, or BLOOD!" screamed one editorial. "Let the sword be drawn and the scabbard thrown away!"[186] In June, Congress authorized 50,000 troops and a $10 million budget[187] in the event foreign military troops crossed into United States territory.[citation needed]
Van Buren wanted peace and met with the British minister to the United States. The two men agreed to resolve the border issue diplomatically.[188] Van Buren sent General Scott to the scene to lower the tensions. Scott successfully convinced all sides to submit the border issue to arbitration. The border dispute was put to rest a few years later, with the signing of the 1842 Webster–Ashburton Treaty.[180][182]
Amistad case: victory for the ex-slaves
[edit]The Amistad case was a freedom suit that involved international issues and was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. It resulted from the successful rebellion of African slaves on board the Spanish schooner La Amistad in 1839. The ship ended up in American waters and was seized by the predecessor agency of the Coast Guard.[189] Van Buren viewed abolitionism as the greatest threat to the nation's unity, and he resisted the slightest interference with slavery in the states where it existed.[190] His administration supported the Spanish government's demand that the ship and its cargo (including the Africans) be turned over to Spain. However, abolitionist lawyers intervened. A federal district court judge ruled that the Africans were legally free and should be transported home, but Van Buren's administration appealed the case to the Supreme Court.[191]
In the Supreme Court in February 1840, John Quincy Adams argued passionately for the Africans' right to freedom. Van Buren's Attorney General Henry D. Gilpin presented the government's case. In March 1841, the Supreme Court issued its final verdict: the Amistad Africans were free people and should be allowed to return home.[192] The unique nature of the case heightened public interest in the saga, including the participation of former president Adams, Africans testifying in federal court, and their representation by prominent lawyers. Van Buren's administration lost its case and the ex-slaves won. The episode case drew attention to the personal tragedies of slavery and attracted new support for the growing abolition movement in the North. It also transformed the courts into the principal forum for a national debate on the legal foundations of slavery.[193]
Judicial appointments
[edit]Van Buren appointed two Associate Justices to the Supreme Court:[194] John McKinley, confirmed September 25, 1837, and Peter Vivian Daniel, confirmed March 2, 1841. He also appointed eight other federal judges, all to United States district courts.[195]
White House hostess
[edit]For the first half of his presidency, Van Buren, who had been a widower for many years, did not have a specific person to act as White House hostess at administration social events, but tried to assume such duties himself. When his eldest son Abraham Van Buren married Angelica Singleton in 1838, he quickly acted to install his daughter-in-law as his hostess. She solicited the advice of her distant relative, Dolley Madison,[196] who had moved back to Washington after her husband's death,[197] and soon the president's parties livened up. After the 1839 New Year's Eve reception, The Boston Post raved: "[Angelica Van Buren is a] lady of rare accomplishments, very modest yet perfectly easy and graceful in her manners and free and vivacious in her conversation ... universally admired."[196]
As the nation endured a deep economic depression, Angelica Van Buren's receiving style at receptions was influenced by her heavy reading about European court life (and her naive delight in being received as the Queen of the United States when she visited the royal courts of England and France after her marriage). Newspaper coverage of this, and the claim that she intended to re-landscape the White House grounds to resemble the royal gardens of Europe, was used in a political attack on her father-in-law by a Pennsylvania Whig Congressman Charles Ogle. He referred obliquely to her as part of the presidential "household" in his famous Gold Spoon Oration. The attack was delivered in Congress and the depiction of the president as living a royal lifestyle was a primary factor in his defeat for re-election.[198]
Presidential election of 1840
[edit]
Van Buren easily won renomination for a second term at the 1840 Democratic National Convention in Baltimore, Maryland, but he and his party faced a difficult election in 1840. Van Buren's presidency had been a difficult affair, with the U.S. economy mired in a severe downturn, and other divisive issues, such as slavery, western expansion, and tensions with the United Kingdom, providing opportunities for Van Buren's political opponents—including some of his fellow Democrats—to criticize his actions.[147] Although Van Buren's renomination was never in doubt, Democratic strategists began to question the wisdom of keeping Johnson on the ticket. Even former president Jackson conceded that Johnson was a liability and insisted on former House Speaker James K. Polk of Tennessee as Van Buren's new running mate. Van Buren was reluctant to drop Johnson, who was popular with workers and radicals in the North[199] and added military experience to the ticket, which might prove important against likely Whig nominee William Henry Harrison.[139] Rather than re-nominating Johnson, the Democratic convention decided to allow state Democratic Party leaders to select the vice-presidential candidates for their states.[200]
Van Buren hoped that the Whigs would nominate Clay for president, which would allow Van Buren to cast the 1840 campaign as a clash between Van Buren's Independent Treasury system and Clay's support for a national bank. However, rather than nominating longtime party spokesmen like Clay and Daniel Webster, the 1839 Whig National Convention nominated Harrison, who had served in various governmental positions during his career and had earned fame for his military leadership in the Battle of Tippecanoe and the War of 1812. Whig leaders like William Seward and Thaddeus Stevens believed that Harrison's war record would effectively counter the popular appeals of the Democratic Party. For vice president, the Whigs nominated former Senator John Tyler of Virginia. Clay was deeply disappointed by his defeat at the convention, but he nonetheless threw his support behind Harrison.[201]
Whigs presented Harrison as the antithesis of the president, whom they derided as ineffective, corrupt, and effete.[147] Whigs also depicted Van Buren as an aristocrat living in high style in the White House, while they used images of Harrison in a log cabin sipping cider to convince voters that he was a man of the people.[202] They threw such jabs as "Van, Van, is a used-up man" and "Martin Van Ruin" and ridiculed him in newspapers and cartoons.[203] Issues of policy were not absent from the campaign; the Whigs derided the alleged executive overreaches of Jackson and Van Buren, while also calling for a national bank and higher tariffs.[204] Democrats attempted to campaign on the Independent Treasury system, but the onset of deflation undercut these arguments.[205] The enthusiasm for "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too", coupled with the country's severe economic crisis, made it impossible for Van Buren to win a second term.[202] Harrison won by a popular vote of 1,275,612 to 1,130,033, and an electoral vote margin of 234 to 60.[141] An astonishing 80% of eligible voters went to the polls on election day.[147] Van Buren actually won more votes than he had in 1836, but the Whig success in attracting new voters more than canceled out Democratic gains.[206] Additionally, Whigs won majorities for the first time in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.[139]
Post-presidency (1841–1862)
[edit]Election of 1844
[edit]On the expiration of his term, Van Buren returned to his estate of Lindenwald in Kinderhook.[207] He continued to closely watch political developments, including the battle between the Whig alliance of the Great Triumvirate and President John Tyler, who took office after Harrison's death in April 1841.[208] Though undecided on another presidential run, Van Buren made several moves calculated to maintain his support, including a trip to the Southern United States and the Western United States during which he met with Jackson, former Speaker of the House James K. Polk, and others.[209] President Tyler, James Buchanan, Levi Woodbury, and others loomed as potential challengers for the 1844 Democratic nomination, but it was Calhoun who posed the most formidable obstacle.[210]
Van Buren remained silent on major public issues like the debate over the Tariff of 1842, hoping to arrange for the appearance of a draft movement for his presidential candidacy.[211] Tyler made the annexation of Texas his chief foreign policy goal, and many Democrats, particularly in the South, were anxious to quickly complete it.[212] After an explosion on the USS Princeton killed Secretary of State Abel P. Upshur in February 1844, Tyler brought Calhoun into his cabinet to direct foreign affairs.[213] Like Tyler, Calhoun pursued the annexation of Texas to upend the presidential race and to extend slavery into new territories.[214]
Shortly after taking office, Calhoun negotiated an annexation treaty between the United States and Texas.[215] Van Buren had hoped he would not have to take a public stand on annexation, but as the Texas question came to dominate U.S. politics, he decided to make his views on the issue public.[216] Though he believed that his public acceptance of annexation would likely help him win the 1844 Democratic nomination, Van Buren thought that annexation would inevitably lead to an unjust war with Mexico.[217] In a public letter published shortly after Henry Clay also announced his opposition to the annexation treaty, Van Buren articulated his views on the Texas question.[218]
Van Buren's opposition to immediate annexation cost him the support of many pro-slavery Democrats.[219] In the weeks before the 1844 Democratic National Convention, Van Buren's supporters anticipated that he would win a majority of the delegates on the first presidential ballot, but would not be able to win the support of the required two-thirds of delegates.[220] Van Buren's supporters attempted to prevent the adoption of the two-thirds rule, but several Northern delegates joined with Southern delegates in implementing the two-thirds rule for the 1844 convention.[221] Van Buren won 146 of the 266 votes on the first presidential ballot, with only 12 of his votes coming from Southern states.[212]
Senator Lewis Cass won much of the remaining vote, and he gradually picked up support on subsequent ballots until the convention adjourned for the day.[222] When the convention reconvened and held another ballot, James K. Polk, who shared many of Van Buren's views but favored immediate annexation, won 44 votes.[223] On the ninth ballot, Van Buren's supporters withdrew his name from consideration, and Polk won the nomination.[224] Although angered that his opponents had denied him the nomination, Van Buren endorsed Polk in the interest of party unity.[225] He also convinced Silas Wright to run for Governor of New York so that the popular Wright could help boost Polk in the state.[226] Wright narrowly defeated Whig nominee Millard Fillmore in the 1844 gubernatorial election, and Wright's victory in the state helped Polk narrowly defeat Henry Clay in the 1844 presidential election.[227]
After taking office, Polk used George Bancroft as an intermediary to offer Van Buren the ambassadorship to London. Van Buren declined, partly because he was upset with Polk over the treatment the Van Buren delegates had received at the 1844 convention, and partly because he was content in his retirement.[228] Polk also consulted Van Buren in the formation of his cabinet, but offended Van Buren by offering to appoint a New Yorker only to the lesser post of Secretary of War, rather than as Secretary of State or Secretary of the Treasury.[229] Other patronage decisions also angered Van Buren and Wright, and they became permanently alienated from the Polk administration.[230]
Election of 1848
[edit]
Though he had previously helped maintain a balance between the Barnburners and Hunkers, the two factions of the New York Democratic Party, Van Buren moved closer to the Barnburners after the 1844 Democratic National Convention.[231] The split in the state party worsened during Polk's presidency, as his administration lavished patronage on the Hunkers.[232] In his retirement, Van Buren also grew increasingly opposed to slavery.[233]
As the Mexican–American War brought the debate over slavery in the territories to the forefront of American politics, Van Buren published an anti-slavery manifesto. In it, he refuted the notion that Congress did not have the power to regulate slavery in the territories, and argued the Founding Fathers had favored the eventual abolition of slavery.[234] The document, which became known as the "Barnburner Manifesto", was edited at Van Buren's request by John Van Buren and Samuel Tilden, both of whom were leaders of the Barnburner faction.[235] After the publication of the Barnburner Manifesto, many Barnburners urged the former president to seek his old office in the 1848 presidential election.[236] The 1848 Democratic National Convention seated competing Barnburner and Hunker delegations from New York, but the Barnburners walked out of the convention when Lewis Cass, who opposed congressional regulation of slavery in the territories, was nominated on the fourth ballot.[237]
In response to the nomination of Cass, the Barnburners began to organize as a third party. At a convention held in June 1848, in Utica, New York, the Barnburners nominated 65-year-old Van Buren for president.[238] Though reluctant to bolt from the Democratic Party, Van Buren accepted the nomination to show the power of the anti-slavery movement, help defeat Cass, and weaken the Hunkers.[239] At a convention held in Buffalo, New York in August 1848, a group of anti-slavery Democrats, Whigs, and members of the abolitionist Liberty Party met in the first national convention of what became known as the Free Soil Party.[240]
The convention unanimously nominated Van Buren, and chose Charles Francis Adams, son of late former President John Quincy Adams and grandson of late former President John Adams, as Van Buren's running mate. In a public message accepting the nomination, Van Buren gave his full support for the Wilmot Proviso, a proposed law that would ban slavery in all territories acquired from Mexico in the Mexican–American War.[240] Anti-slavery Whig orator Daniel Webster, in his "Marshfield Speech", expressed skepticism, in terms that may have influenced Whig voters, about the sincerity of Van Buren's espousal of the anti-slavery cause:
In Mr. Van Buren's anti-slavery professions, Mr. Webster had no confidence. He said pleasantly, but significantly, that "if he and Mr. Van Buren should meet under the Free-soil flag, the latter with his accustomed good-nature would laugh." He added, with a touch of characteristic humor, "that the leader of the Free-spoil party suddenly becoming the leader of the Free-soil party is a joke to shake his sides and mine."[241]
Van Buren won no electoral votes, but finished second to Whig nominee Zachary Taylor in New York, taking enough votes from Cass to give the state—and perhaps the election—to Taylor.[242] Nationwide, Van Buren won 10.1% of the popular vote, the strongest showing by a third-party presidential nominee up to that point in U.S. history.
Retirement
[edit]Van Buren never sought public office again after the 1848 election, but he continued to closely follow national politics. He was deeply troubled by the stirrings of secessionism in the South and welcomed the Compromise of 1850 as a necessary conciliatory measure despite his opposition to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.[243] Van Buren also worked on a history of American political parties and embarked on a tour of Europe, becoming the first former U.S. president to visit Britain.[244] Though still concerned about slavery, Van Buren and his followers returned to the Democratic fold, partly out of the fear that a continuing Democratic split would help the Whig Party.[245] He also attempted to reconcile the Barnburners and the Hunkers, with mixed results.[246]
Van Buren supported Franklin Pierce for president in 1852,[247] James Buchanan in 1856,[248] and Stephen A. Douglas in 1860.[249] Van Buren viewed the fledgling Know Nothing movement with contempt and felt that the anti-slavery Republican Party exacerbated sectional tensions.[250] He considered Chief Justice Roger Taney's ruling in the 1857 case of Dred Scott v. Sandford to be a "grievous mistake" since it overturned the Missouri Compromise.[251] He assessed that the Buchanan administration handled the issue of Bleeding Kansas poorly, and saw the Lecompton Constitution as a sop to Southern extremists.[252]

After the election of Abraham Lincoln and the secession of several Southern states in 1860, Van Buren unsuccessfully sought to call a constitutional convention.[249] In April 1861, former president Pierce wrote to the other living former presidents and asked them to consider meeting to use their stature and influence to propose a negotiated end to the war. Pierce asked the 78-year-old Van Buren to use his role as the senior living ex-president to issue a formal call. Van Buren's reply suggested that Buchanan should be the one to call the meeting, since he was the former president who had served most recently, or that Pierce should issue the call himself if he strongly believed in the merit of his proposal. Neither Buchanan nor Pierce was willing to make Pierce's proposal public, and nothing more resulted from it.[253] Once the American Civil War began, Van Buren made public his support for the Union cause.[254]
Death
[edit]
Van Buren's health began to fail later in 1861, and he was bedridden with pneumonia during the fall and winter of 1861–1862.[255] He died of bronchial asthma and heart failure at his Lindenwald estate at 2:00 a.m. on Thursday, July 24, 1862.[256] He is buried in the Kinderhook Reformed Dutch Church Cemetery, as are his wife Hannah, his parents, and his son Martin Van Buren Jr.[257]
Van Buren outlived all four of his immediate successors: Harrison, Tyler, Polk, and Taylor.[258] In addition, he saw more successors ascend to the presidency than anyone else (eight), living to see Abraham Lincoln elected as the 16th President before his death.[259]
Legacy
[edit]Historical reputation
[edit]Van Buren's most lasting achievement was as a political organizer who built the Democratic Party and guided it to dominance in the Second Party System,[260] and historians have come to regard Van Buren as integral to the development of the American political system.[30] According to Robert V. Remini, "Van Buren's creative contribution to the political development of the nation was enormous, and as such he earned his way to the presidency… Heretofore parties were regarded as evils to be tolerated; Van Buren argued that the party system was the most sensible and intelligent way the affairs of the nation could be democratically conducted, a viewpoint that eventually won national approval".[261]

His presidency is considered to be average, at best, by historians. He was blamed for the Panic of 1837 and defeated for reelection.[30] His tenure was dominated by the economic conditions caused by the panic, and historians have split on the adequacy of the Independent Treasury as a response.[262] Some historians disagree with these negative assessments. For example, libertarian writer Ivan Eland, in his 2009 book Recarving Rushmore, ranked Van Buren as the third greatest president.[263][264] He argues that Van Buren handled the Panic of 1837 well, and praised Van Buren for reducing government spending, balancing the budget, and avoiding potential wars with Canada and Mexico.[263][264] Historian Jeffrey Rogers Hummel states that Van Buren was America's greatest president, arguing that "historians have grossly underrated his many remarkable accomplishments in the face of heavy odds".[265]
Several writers have portrayed Van Buren as among the nation's most obscure presidents. As noted in a 2014 Time magazine article on the "Top 10 Forgettable Presidents":
Making himself nearly disappear completely from the history books was probably not the trick the "Little Magician" Martin Van Buren had in mind, but his was the first truly forgettable American presidency.[266]
Memorials
[edit]Van Buren's home in Kinderhook, New York, which he called Lindenwald, is now the Martin Van Buren National Historic Site.[267] Counties are named for Van Buren in Michigan, Iowa, Arkansas, and Tennessee.[268] Mount Van Buren, USS Van Buren, three state parks and numerous towns were named after him.
Popular culture
[edit]Association with "OK"
[edit]During Martin Van Buren's 1840 re-election campaign, the abbreviation "OK" gained prominence as a slogan supporting his candidacy. Van Buren, whose nickname "Old Kinderhook" referenced his birthplace in Kinderhook, New York, used the term as a symbol of approval and solidarity among his supporters. Although "OK" was initially popularized as a humorous abbreviation for "oll korrect" (a deliberate misspelling of "all correct") in newspapers during the late 1830s, its association with Van Buren's campaign helped solidify its place in American vernacular. Despite the widespread use of "OK," Van Buren was defeated in the 1840 election by William Henry Harrison, but the term continued to gain global recognition over the following decades.
Books
[edit]In Gore Vidal's 1973 novel Burr, a major plot theme is an attempt to prevent Van Buren's election as president by proving he is the illegitimate son of Aaron Burr.[269]
Comic strips
[edit]After the 1988 presidential campaign, George H. W. Bush, a Yale University graduate and member of the Skull and Bones secret society, became the first incumbent vice president to win election to the presidency since Van Buren. In the comic strip Doonesbury, artist Garry Trudeau depicted members of Skull and Bones as stealing Van Buren's skull as a congratulatory gift to the new president.[270][271]
Currency
[edit]Martin Van Buren appeared in the presidential dollar coins series in 2008.[272] The U.S. Mint also issued commemorative silver medals for Van Buren, released for sale in 2021.[273][274]
Film and TV
[edit]Van Buren is portrayed by Nigel Hawthorne in the 1997 film Amistad. The film depicts the legal battle surrounding the status of slaves who in 1839 rebelled against their transporters on La Amistad slave ship.[275]
On the television show Seinfeld, the 1997 episode "The Van Buren Boys" is about a fictional street gang that admires Van Buren and bases its rituals and symbols on him, including the hand sign of eight fingers pointing up to signify Van Buren, the eighth president.[276]
See also
[edit]- Charlotte Dupuy, a slave who worked for Van Buren at Decatur House, while her suit for freedom against Henry Clay proceeded
- List of presidents of the United States who owned slaves
- Presidents of the United States on U.S. postage stamps
Notes
[edit]- ^ The "mistletoe" nickname was inspired by the fact that mistletoe is a parasitic plant which attaches itself to a host tree to survive. Comparing Van Buren to mistletoe implied that he advanced politically only through his connection to the "Old Hickory" tree, which represented Andrew Jackson. This idea was common in Whig propaganda pieces, and also seen in political comics such as The Rejected Minister, where Van Buren is shown being carried into office by Jackson.
References
[edit]- ^ Widmer, Ted and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Edward L. Widmer, Martin Van Buren, Times Books, 2005, p. 2. ISBN 0-8050-6922-4
- ^ "The Wise Guide: The Red Fox of Kinderhook". Library of Congress. December 2011. Archived from the original on February 4, 2023. Retrieved June 15, 2018.
- ^ Silbey, Joel (September 26, 2016). "Martin Van Buren". Miller Center of Public Affairs. Archived from the original on June 15, 2018. Retrieved June 15, 2018.
- ^ Hatfield, Mark O. (1997). "Martin Van Buren (1833–1837)" (PDF). Vice Presidents of the United States, 1789–1993 (PDF). Senate Historical Office. Washington: US Government Printing Office. pp. 105–118. OCLC 606133503. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 6, 2017. Retrieved June 15, 2018.
- ^ "Martin van Buren [1782–1862]". New Netherland Institute. Archived from the original on September 14, 2015. Retrieved February 24, 2020.
- ^ Cole 1984, pp. 3, 9.
- ^ Widmer 2005, pp. 153–165.
- ^ Roberts, James A. (1898). New York in the Revolution as Colony and State. Albany: Brandow Printing Company. p. 109.
- ^ Kane, Joseph Nathan (1998). Presidential Fact Book. Random House. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-375-70244-0.
- ^ Foss, William O. (2005). Childhoods of the American Presidents. Jefferson: McFarland Publishing. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-7864-2382-8.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 5–6.
- ^ "Martin Van Buren, 1782–1862". Historical Society of the New York Courts. Archived from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved March 4, 2015.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 14.
- ^ Alexander, De Alva S. Alexander (1906). A Political History of the State of New York. Vol. I. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company. p. 206 – via Google Books.
- ^ Widmer 2005, pp. 6–7.
- ^ Sidey, Hugh (1999). The Presidents of the United States of America. Washington, DC: White House Historical Association. p. 23. ISBN 978-0-912308-73-9.
- ^ Brooke 2010, p. 230.
- ^ Henretta, James A.; Edwards, Rebecca; Hinderaker, Eric; Self, Robert O. (2015). America: a Concise History, Combined Volume. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's. p. 290. ISBN 978-1-4576-4862-5.
- ^ Loizeau, Pierre-Marie (2008). Martin Van Buren: The Little Magician. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. p. 3. ISBN 9781616680541.
- ^ Loizeau, Pierre-Marie (2008). Martin Van Buren: The Little Magician. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. p. 10. ISBN 978-1-60456-773-1.
- ^ Koenig, Louis William (1960). The Invisible Presidency. New York: Rinehart & Company. p. 89.
- ^ Foss, William O. (2005). Childhoods of the American Presidents. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. p. 46. ISBN 978-0-7864-2382-8.
- ^ Bright, John W. (1970). Master Plan, Lindenwald National Historic Site, New York. Washington, DC: National Park Service. p. 9 – via Google Books.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 8–9.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 10–11.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 14–15.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 15–17.
- ^ Lazo, Caroline Evensen (2005). Martin Van Buren. Lerner Publications Company. p. 14. ISBN 978-0-8225-1394-0.
- ^ Matuz, Roger (2012). The Presidents Fact Book. Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers. p. 152. ISBN 978-1-57912-889-0.
- ^ a b c Silbey, Joel (October 4, 2016). "Martin Van Buren: Life in Brief". Miller Center of Public Affairs University of Virginia. Archived from the original on April 3, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2017.
- ^ Silbey 2002, p. 27.
- ^ McGeehan, John R. (2007). The Everything American History Book. Adams Media. p. 295. ISBN 978-1-60550-265-6.[permanent dead link]
- ^ Mackenzie, William Lyon (1846). The Life and Times of Martin Van Buren. Cooke & Company. pp. 21–22.
- ^ Brooke 2010, p. 283.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 18–22.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 23–24.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 25–26.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 29–32.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 33–39.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 41–42.
- ^ Hannings, Bud (2012). The War of 1812: A Complete Chronology with Biographies of 63 General Officers. Jefferson: McFarland & Co. p. 327. ISBN 978-0-7864-6385-5.
- ^ Vile, John R. (2001). Great American Lawyers: An Encyclopedia, Volume 1. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. p. 689. ISBN 978-1-57607-202-8.
- ^ Eisenhower, John S.D. (1997). Agent of Destiny: The Life and Times of General Winfield Scott. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. pp. 100–101. ISBN 978-0-8061-3128-3.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 43.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 48–50.
- ^ Marsh, Dwight Whitney (1895). Marsh Genealogy: Giving Several Thousand Descendants of John Marsh of Hartford, Ct. 1636–1895. Amherst: Carpenter & Morehouse. p. 71.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 51–52.
- ^ Lewis, Benjamin F. (1819). Report of the Trial of the Murderers of Richard Jennings in Orange County, NY (PDF). Newburgh. Archived from the original (PDF) on April 15, 2021. Retrieved November 25, 2019.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 58–59.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 61–62.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 63–64.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 62.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 64–65.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 110.
- ^ Lazo, p. 30.
- ^ Allen, Oliver E. (1993). The Tiger: The Rise and Fall of Tammany Hall. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. pp. 27–50. ISBN 978-0-201-62463-2.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 81–82.
- ^ Keyssar, Alexander (2000). The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. Basic Books. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-465-01014-1.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 92–93.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 26–27.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 117.
- ^ "History of the Committee on Finance United States Senate (S. Doc. 97-5) | The United States Senate Committee on Finance | The United States Senate Committee on Finance". www.finance.senate.gov. Retrieved August 22, 2025.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 176.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 432.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 126–127.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 129–130.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 139–140.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 143–144.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 145–146.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 146–148.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 151–152.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 152–153.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 156–157.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 157–158.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 158, 160–161.
- ^ Silbey 2002, p. 44.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 164–165.
- ^ Stoddard, William Osborn (1887). Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren. Frederick A. Stokes. p. 284.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 111.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 163–164.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 177–178.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 27–28.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 178–181.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 196–199.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 201.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 194–196.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 202–203, 209.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 209.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 206–208.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 211.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 211–212.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 214–215.
- ^ Wilson 1984, p. 9.
- ^ Benjamin, Gerald (2012). The Oxford Handbook of New York State Government and Politics. Oxford University Press. p. 322. ISBN 978-0-19-999635-3.
- ^ Neu, Irene D. (2010) [First published 1960]. Erastus Corning: Merchant and Financier, 1794–1872. Cornell University Press. p. 91. ISBN 978-0-8014-7645-7.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 218–219.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 228.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 229–231.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 203.
- ^ "Martin Van Buren". Biographies of the Secretaries of State. U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian. Archived from the original on December 5, 2018. Retrieved November 8, 2014.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 250–252.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 261–262.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 245–247.
- ^ Heller III, J. Roderick (2010). Democracy's Lawyer: Felix Grundy of the Old Southwest. Louisiana State University Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-0-8071-3742-0.
- ^ Cheathem, Mark Renfred; Mancall, Peter C. (2008). Jacksonian and Antebellum Age: People and Perspectives. ABC-CLIO, Inc. p. 30. ISBN 978-1-59884-017-9.
- ^ Manweller 2012, p. 232.
- ^ Cheathem, Mark R. (2015). Andrew Jackson and the Rise of the Democrats: A Reference Guide. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. p. 131. ISBN 978-1-61069-406-3.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 249–253.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 249, 253.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 9–10.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 266.
- ^ Watson, Robert P. (2012). Affairs of State: The Untold History of Presidential Love, Sex, and Scandal, 1789–1900. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 196. ISBN 978-1-4422-1834-5.
- ^ Watson, Harry L. (2006). Liberty and Power: The Politics of Jacksonian America. New York: Hill & Wang. p. 125. ISBN 978-0-8090-6547-9.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 266, 269–270.
- ^ Manweller 2012, p. 246.
- ^ Shepard 1899, pp. 224, 248.
- ^ Polk, James Knox (1996). Correspondence of James K. Polk: January–June 1845. University of Tennessee Press. p. 357. ISBN 978-0-87049-947-0.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 124.
- ^ Risjord, Norman K. (2001). Representative Americans: The Romantics. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-7425-2083-7.
- ^ Howe 2007, p. 378.
- ^ Haynes, Stan M. (2012). The First American Political Conventions: Transforming Presidential Nominations, 1832–1872. McFarland & Company, Inc. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-7864-9030-1.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 10–11.
- ^ Silbey 2002, pp. 81–82.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 300–301.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 301–303.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 303, 306–307.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 307–308.
- ^ Murrin, John (2009). Liberty, Equality, Power: Enhanced Concise Edition. Thomson Wadsworth. p. 327. ISBN 978-0-495-56598-7.
- ^ Holland, William M. (1836). The Life and Political Opinions of Martin Van Buren, Vice President of the United States. Belknap & Hammersley. p. 344.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 321–322.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 328.
- ^ Purcell, L. Edward (2010). Vice Presidents: A Biographical Dictionary. Facts on File, Inc. p. 81. ISBN 978-1-4381-3071-2.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 330–332.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 330–334.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 355–358.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 14–15.
- ^ Thomas Brown, "From Old Hickory to Sly Fox: The Routinization of Charisma in the Early Democratic Party." Journal of the Early Republic 11.3 (1991): 339–369 online Archived February 21, 2022, at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ a b Irelan, John Robert (1887). "History of the Life, Administration and Times of Martin Van Buren, Eighth President of the United States". Chicago: Fairbanks and Palmer Publishing Company. p. 230. Retrieved March 6, 2017.
- ^ a b c d "Richard Mentor Johnson, 9th Vice President (1837–1841)". Washington: United States Senate, Office of the Historian. Archived from the original on April 15, 2022. Retrieved March 7, 2017.
- ^ Nelson, Michael (2013). Guide to the Presidency and the Executive Branch. CQ Press. p. 1962. ISBN 978-1-4522-3428-1.
- ^ a b c "Presidential Elections". history.com. A+E Networks. January 8, 2010. Archived from the original on June 14, 2018. Retrieved March 7, 2017.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 17–18.
- ^ Howe 2007, pp. 508–509.
- ^ "Martin Van Buren, 8th Vice President (1833–1837)". Washington: United States Senate, Office of the Historian. Archived from the original on November 8, 2014. Retrieved November 8, 2014.
- ^ Singer, Alan J. (2008). New York and Slavery: Time to Teach the Truth. Albany: State University of New York Press. p. 80. ISBN 978-0-7914-7509-6.
- ^ Howe 2007, p. 487.
- ^ a b c d e "Martin Van Buren: Campaigns and Elections". Miller Center of Public Affairs, University of Virginia. October 4, 2016. Archived from the original on March 3, 2022. Retrieved March 7, 2017.
- ^ Blake, Aaron (August 3, 2016). "How a 'faithless elector' in Georgia could cost Donald Trump an electoral college vote". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 16, 2019. Retrieved January 16, 2019.
- ^ Bomboy, Scott (December 19, 2016). "The one election where Faithless Electors made a difference". Constitution Daily. Philadelphia: The National Constitution Center. Archived from the original on March 8, 2017. Retrieved March 7, 2017.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 279.
- ^ Nowlan 2012, p. 320.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 37–40.
- ^ Nowlan 2012, p. 321.
- ^ Wilson 1984, p. 171.
- ^ a b c d "Martin Van Buren: Domestic affairs". Miller Center of Public Affairs University of Virginia. October 4, 2016. Archived from the original on May 17, 2021. Retrieved March 6, 2017.
- ^ Rorabaugh, W. J.; Critchlow, Donald T.; Baker, Paula C. (2004). America's promise: a concise history of the United States. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 210. ISBN 978-0-7425-1189-7.[permanent dead link]
- ^ Seigenthaler, John; Schlesinger, Arthur Meier Jr. (2004). James K Polk. Macmillen. pp. 58–60. ISBN 978-0-8050-6942-6.
- ^ Leonard, Gerald (2002). The Invention of Party Politics: Federalism, Popular Sovereignty, and Constitutional Development in Jacksonian Illinois. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-0-8078-2744-4.
- ^ Churella, Albert J. (2013). The Pennsylvania Railroad: Building an Empire, 1846–1917. Vol. 1. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 69. ISBN 978-0-8122-0762-0.
- ^ Lansford, Tom; Woods, Thomas E., eds. (2008). Exploring American History: From Colonial Times to 1877. Vol. 10. New York: Marshall Cavendish. p. 1046. ISBN 978-0-7614-7758-7.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 58–62.
- ^ Morison, Samuel Eliot (1965). The Oxford History of the American People. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 456.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 61–62.
- ^ Wilson 1984, p. 210.
- ^ Landry, Alysa Landry (February 23, 2016). "Martin Van Buren: The Force Behind the Trail of Tears". Verona: Indian Country Media Network. Archived from the original on March 17, 2017. Retrieved March 16, 2017.
- ^ Sturgis, Amy H. (2006). The Trail of Tears and Indian Removal. Greenwood. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-313-33658-4.
- ^ Anderson, William (1991). Cherokee Removal: Before and After. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press. ISBN 978-0-8203-1254-5.
- ^ "Trail of Tears". history.com. A&E Television Networks. 2014. Archived from the original on October 14, 2017. Retrieved October 27, 2014.
- ^ "Martin van Buren [1782–1862]". Albany: New Netherland Institute. Archived from the original on September 14, 2015. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
- ^ ajeyaseelan (October 11, 2022). "III. Letter to President Van Buren". Bartleby.com. Retrieved March 25, 2025.
- ^ Sacks, Kenneth S. (2008). Emerson: Political Writings. Cambridge University Press. p. xxii. ISBN 978-0-521-88369-6.
- ^ Landry, Alysa (September 13, 2018). "Martin Van Buren: The Force Behind the Trail of Tears". Indian Country Today. Retrieved August 11, 2024.
- ^ John Missall, and Mary Lou Missall, The Seminole Struggle: A History of America's Longest Indian War (Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).
- ^ a b Henretta 2004, p. 109.
- ^ a b Wilson 1984, pp. 151–152.
- ^ a b Neu, C. T. (June 9, 2010). "Annexation". Handbook of Texas Online. Austin: Texas State Historical Association. Archived from the original on August 7, 2020. Retrieved March 11, 2017.
- ^ Merk, Frederick (1978). History of the Westward Movement. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. p. 279. ISBN 978-0-394-41175-0.
- ^ a b Eisenhower, John S.D. (1997). Agent of Destiny: The Life and Times of General Winfield Scott. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. p. 178. ISBN 978-0-8061-3128-3.
- ^ Brinkley, Alan; Dyer, Davis, eds. (2000). The Reader's Companion to the American Presidency. New York: Houghton Mifflin. p. 113. ISBN 978-0-395-78889-9.
- ^ a b c "Martin Van Buren: Foreign Affairs". Miller Center of Public Affairs University of Virginia. October 4, 2016. Archived from the original on March 18, 2017. Retrieved March 6, 2017.
- ^ Ross, Robert Budd (1890). "The Patriot War". The Detroit Evening News, revised for the Michigan Pioneer and Historical Society. pp. 11–12. Retrieved March 25, 2017.
- ^ a b Nowlan 2012, p. 329.
- ^ Lacroix, Patrick (2016). "Choosing Peace and Order: National Security and Sovereignty in a North American Borderland, 1837–42". The International History Review. 38 (5): 943–960. doi:10.1080/07075332.2015.1070892. ISSN 0707-5332. S2CID 155365033.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 164–166.
- ^ "1837 – Aroostook War". Historycentral. Archived from the original on March 18, 2017. Retrieved March 17, 2017.
- ^ Michael T. Perry, "'Maine and Her Soil, or Blood!': Political Rhetoric and Spatial Identity during the Aroostook War in Maine". Maine History 47.1 (2013): 68–93 online Archived June 27, 2023, at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ "The High Comedy of the Bloodless Aroostook War". New England Historical Society. March 10, 2015. Archived from the original on October 6, 2017. Retrieved March 17, 2017.
- ^ Silbey 2002, p. 128.
- ^ Howard Jones, Mutiny on the Amistad: the saga of a slave revolt and its impact on American abolition, law, and diplomacy (Oxford University Press, 1997).
- ^ "Martin Van Buren, First Inaugural, March 4, 1837 | AMDOCS: Documents for the Study of American History". Vlib.us. Archived from the original on December 5, 2011. Retrieved December 5, 2011.
I must go into the Presidential chair with the inflexible and uncompromising opponent of every attempt on the part of Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia against the wishes of the slaveholding States, and also with a determination equally decided to resist the slightest interference with it in the States where it exists.
- ^ Marcus Rediker, The Amistad Rebellion: An Atlantic Odyssey of Slavery and Freedom (Penguin, 2013).
- ^ "Amistad Story". Amistad: Seeking Freedom in Connecticut. National Park Service's National Register of Historic Places U.S. Department of the Interior. Archived from the original on May 12, 2017. Retrieved March 13, 2017.
- ^ "A Brief Narrative". Teaching and Civic Outreach Resources Amistad: The Federal Courts and the Challenge to Slavery – Historical Background and Documents. Washington: Federal Judicial Center. Archived from the original on December 31, 2016. Retrieved March 13, 2017.
- ^ "U.S. Senate: Supreme Court Nominations: 1789–Present". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved March 8, 2017.
- ^ "Federal Judicial Center: Search by Nominating President; Martin Van Buren". Federal Judicial Center. Federal Judicial Center Foundation. Archived from the original on February 16, 2015. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
- ^ a b Caroli, Betty Boyd (2003). First Ladies. Oxford University Press. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-19-516676-7. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
- ^ "Van Buren's Presidential Hostess". America's Story. Library of Congress. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. Retrieved March 9, 2017.
- ^ Anthony, Carl (September 24, 2014). "First Ladies Never Married to Presidents: Angelica Van Buren". National First Ladies Library. Archived from the original on August 13, 2018. Retrieved March 10, 2017.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 358.
- ^ "Democratic National Political Conventions, 1832–2008". Washington: Library of Congress. Archived from the original on November 2, 2020. Retrieved March 7, 2017.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 191–195.
- ^ a b "Historical Context: Setting the Stage". Teaching with Historic Places: Martin Van Buren's "Return to the Soil" (39). National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior. Archived from the original on March 28, 2017. Retrieved March 12, 2017.
- ^ Manweller 2012, p. 278.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 199–200.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 203–204.
- ^ Wilson 1984, pp. 206–207.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 478–479.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 487–488.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 488–494.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 501.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 504–505.
- ^ a b Lambert, Robert S. (March 1955). "The Democratic National Convention of 1844". Tennessee Historical Quarterly. 14 (1): 3–23. JSTOR 42621214.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 516–520.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 518–520.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 520.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 520–521, 525.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 525–527.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 528–529.
- ^ Moore, John Trotwood; Foster, Austin Powers (1923). Tennessee: The Volunteer State, 1769–1923. S. J. Clarke Publishing Company. p. 422.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 533–534.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 535–538.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 538.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 539.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 539–540.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 541–542.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 547–548.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 548.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 405.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 550–556.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 564–565.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 543–544.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 570–571.
- ^ Ferrell, Claudine L. (2006). The Abolitionist Movement. Westport: Greenwood Press. p. 88. ISBN 978-0-313-33180-0.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 567–570.
- ^ Silbey 2002, pp. 193–194.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 575–576.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 580.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 581–585.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 585–586.
- ^ a b Niven 1983, pp. 587–589.
- ^ Blaine, James Gillespie. "Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1 From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860". gutenberg.org. Archived from the original on June 6, 2021. Retrieved October 18, 2021.
- ^ Manweller 2012, p. 271.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 592.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 598–602.
- ^ Silbey 2002, p. 203.
- ^ Silbey 2002, p. 204.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 596.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 605.
- ^ a b Niven 1983, p. 610.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 604–605.
- ^ Niven 1983, pp. 605–606.
- ^ Niven 1983, p. 607.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 425.
- ^ Widmer 2005, p. 164.
- ^ Dunlap, Leslie Whittaker (1988). Our Vice-Presidents and Second Ladies. Metuchen: Scarecrow Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-8108-2114-9.
- ^ Butler, William Allen (1862). Martin Van Buren: Lawyer, Statesman and Man. New York: D. Appleton and Company. p. 5.
- ^ Lamb, Brian & the C-SPAN staff (2000). Who's Buried in Grant's Tomb?: A Tour of Presidential Gravesites. Washington: National Cable Satellite Corporation. ISBN 978-1-881846-07-9.
- ^ Glass, Andrew (July 21, 2014). "Van Buren slips into coma". Politico. Archived from the original on May 14, 2019. Retrieved May 14, 2019.
- ^ "Executive Order on death of Martin van Buren". Archived from the original on January 13, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2021.
- ^ Cole 1984, p. 16.
- ^ Robert Remini, "Van Buren, Martin" in John A. Garraty, ed., Encyclopedia of American Biography (1974) pp 1120–1122.
- ^ "Martin Van Buren: Impact and Legacy". Miller Center of Public Affairs University of Virginia. October 4, 2016. Archived from the original on March 28, 2017. Retrieved March 16, 2017.
- ^ a b Eland, Ivan (2009). Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty. Independent Institute. pp. 70–91. ISBN 978-1-59813-022-5.
- ^ a b Doucet, Bradley (2013). "What Makes a Good President? A Review of Ivan Eland's Recarving Rushmore". Le Québécois Libre. Archived from the original on August 19, 2022. Retrieved August 18, 2025.
- ^ Hummel, Jeffrey Rogers (1999). "Martin Van Buren: The Greatest American President". The Independent Review. 4 (2): 255–281. ISSN 1086-1653. JSTOR 24560894. Archived from the original on April 13, 2022. Retrieved April 13, 2022.
- ^ Fletcher, Dan (March 10, 2009). "Top Ten Forgettable Presidents: Martin Van Buren". Time. Archived from the original on February 28, 2017. Retrieved March 14, 2017.
- ^ "One Hundred Years in the Making: Lindenwald Celebrates "Being Forty and Fabulous"". Martin Van Buren National Historic Site. Washington: National Park Service. Archived from the original on April 7, 2017. Retrieved May 2, 2017.
- ^ Gannett, Henry (1905). The Origin of Certain Place Names in the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 309.
- ^ Hanc, John (June 6, 2016). "Before There Was "Hamilton," There Was "Burr"". Smithsonian. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Archived from the original on September 12, 2022. Retrieved September 12, 2022.
- ^ Widmer 2005, p. 170.
- ^ Loizeau, Pierre-Marie (2008). Martin Van Buren: The Little Magician. Nova Science Publishers. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-60456-773-1.
- ^ Unusually, the date appears on the rim of the coin, as do the mottoes In God We Trust and E Pluribus Unum
- ^ U.S. Mint (January 28, 2021). "Silver Medal Honoring President Martin Van Buren on Sale February 1". CoinWeek (Press release). Archived from the original on January 30, 2021. Retrieved January 31, 2021.
- ^ "Martin Van Buren Presidential Silver Medal – US Mint". Archived from the original on October 18, 2021. Retrieved October 18, 2021.
- ^ "Stephen Spielberg's "Amistad" (1997)". University of Missouri-Kansas City. Archived from the original on June 24, 2016. Retrieved July 9, 2016.
- ^ Delaney, Tim (2006). Seinology: The Sociology of Seinfeld. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. p. 152. ISBN 978-1-6159-2084-6 – via Google Books.
Sources
[edit]- Brooke, John L. (2010). "Chapter 7: 'Party and Corruption: The Columbia Junto and the Rise of Martin Van Buren, 1799–1812'". Columbia Rising: Civil Life on the Upper Hudson from the Revolution to the Age of Jackson. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-0-8078-3323-0.
- Cole, Donald (1984). Martin Van Buren and the American Political System. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-64025-9. online
- Henretta, James A. (2004). "Martin Van Buren". In Brinkley, Alan; Dyer, Davis (eds.). The American Presidency. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. pp. 103–114. ISBN 978-0-618-38273-6.
- Howe, Daniel Walker (2007). What hath God wrought: the transformation of America, 1815–1848. New York, New York: Oxford University Press USA. ISBN 978-0-19-507894-7.
- Manweller, Mathew, ed. (2012). Chronology of the U.S. Presidency. Vol. 1. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-59884-645-4.
- Niven, John (1983). Martin Van Buren : The Romantic Age of American Politics. New York, New York: Oxford University Press USA. ISBN 978-0-945707-25-7. online
- Nowlan, Robert A. (2012). The American presidents, from Washington to Tyler. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. ISBN 978-0-7864-6336-7.
- Shepard, Edward M. (1899). Martin Van Buren. American Statesmen, Volume 18: Domestic Politics – The Tariff and Slavery. Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin and Co. Archived from the original on February 21, 2022. Retrieved May 4, 2020 – via Project Gutenberg.
- Silbey, Joel H. (2002). Martin Van Buren and the Emergence of American Popular Politics. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-2243-5.
- Widmer, Ted (2005). Martin Van Buren: The American Presidents Series: The 8th President, 1837-1841. New York, New York: Times Books. ISBN 978-0-8050-6922-8.
- Wilson, Major L. (1984). The Presidency of Martin Van Buren. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas. ISBN 978-0-7006-0238-4.
Further reading
[edit]- Alexander, Holmes (1935). The American Talleyrand: Martin Van Buren.; online
- Boller, Paul F. (2004). "Chapter 13: Van Buren's Victory over three Whigs". Presidential Campaigns: From George Washington to George W. Bush. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516716-0.
- Ceaser, James W. "III. Martin Van Buren and the Case for Electoral Restraint", in Presidential Selection (Princeton University Press, 2020). 123–169.
- Curtis, James C. (1970). The Fox at Bay: Martin Van Buren and the Presidency, 1837–1841. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 978-0-8131-1214-5.
- Curtis, James C. "In the Shadow of Old Hickory: The Political Travail of Martin Van Buren", Journal of the Early Republic 1.3 (1981): 249–267 online Archived December 24, 2019, at the Wayback Machine.
- Duncan, Jason K. "'Plain Catholics of the North': Martin Van Buren and the Politics of Religion, 1807–1836", U.S. Catholic Historian 38.1 (2020): 25–48.
- Gammon, Samuel Rhea (1922). The Presidential Campaign of 1832. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
- Holt, Michael F. (1999). The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party: Jacksonian Politics and the Onset of the Civil War. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-505544-3. online
- Lucas, M. Philip. "Martin Van Buren as Party Leader and at Andrew Jackson's Right Hand", in A Companion to the Antebellum Presidents 1837–1861 (2014): 107–129
- McBride, Spencer W. "When Joseph Smith Met Martin Van Buren: Mormonism and the Politics of Religious Liberty in Nineteenth-Century America", Church History 85.1 (2016).
- Mihalkanin, Edward, ed. (2004). "Martin Van Buren". American Statesmen: Secretaries of State from John Jay to Colin Powell. Westport, CT: Greenport Press. pp. 504–511. ISBN 978-0-313-30828-4.
- Mushkat, Jerome. Martin Van Buren: law, politics, and the shaping of Republican ideology (1997) online
- Remini, Robert V. (1959). Martin Van Buren and the making of the Democratic Party. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Remini, Robert V. "The Albany Regency." New York History 39.4 (1958): 341+.
- Schouler, James (1889). History of the United States of America, 1831–1847. Democrats and Whigs. Vol. 4. Washington: W. H. Morrison.
- Sellers, Charles (1992). The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815–1846. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-503889-7.; online
- Silbey, Joel H. (2009). Party Over Section: The Rough and Ready Presidential Election of 1848. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ISBN 978-0-7006-1640-4.
- Silbey, Joel H. (2014). A Companion to the Antebellum Presidents, 1837–1861. Wiley. pp. 109–154. ISBN 978-1-118-60929-3.
- Wise, W. Harvey; Cronin, John W., eds. (2010). A Bibliography Of Andrew Jackson And Martin Van Buren. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 978-1-163-19693-9.
Books by Van Buren
[edit]- Van Buren, Martin (1867). Van Buren, Abraham; Van Buren, John (eds.). Inquiry into the Origin and Course of Political Parties in the United States. New York: Hurd and Houghton.
- Van Buren, Martin (1920). Fitzpatrick, John Clement (ed.). The Autobiography of Martin Van Buren. Annual Report Of The American Historical Association For The Year 1918. Vol. II. Washington: Govt. Print. Off.
External links
[edit]- United States Congress. "Martin Van Buren (id: V000009)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
- Martin Van Buren: A Resource Guide Archived June 12, 2017, at the Wayback Machine at the Library of Congress
- The Papers of Martin Van Buren Archived April 17, 2016, at the Wayback Machine at Cumberland University; when completed, this website will feature 13,000 transcribed Van Burn papers.
- The American Presidency Project – The Papers of Martin Van Buren Archived August 20, 2019, at the Wayback Machine (Online Collection) at University of California, Santa Barbara
- American President: Martin Van Buren (1782–1862) Archived October 30, 2011, at the Wayback Machine at the Miller Center of Public Affairs, University of Virginia
- Inaugural Address (March 4, 1837), at the Miller Center
- Martin Van Buren National Historic Site (Lindenwald) , National Park Service
- . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. XXIV (9th ed.). 1888.
- "Life Portrait of Martin Van Buren" Archived January 6, 2019, at the Wayback Machine, from C-SPAN's American Presidents: Life Portraits, May 3, 1999
- Works by Martin Van Buren at Project Gutenberg
- Works by or about Martin Van Buren at the Internet Archive
- Works by Martin Van Buren at LibriVox (public domain audiobooks)

Martin Van Buren
View on GrokipediaMartin Van Buren (December 5, 1782 – July 24, 1862) was an American lawyer and statesman of Dutch descent who served as the eighth president of the United States from 1837 to 1841, succeeding Andrew Jackson as the second president from the Democratic Party.[1][2] Born in Kinderhook, New York, to a tavernkeeper and farmer, Van Buren was the first U.S. president not of British ancestry and the last to have been born a British subject under colonial rule.[3][4] Van Buren played a pivotal role in organizing the Democratic Party and establishing the second party system, rising through New York politics as a state senator, attorney general, and governor before serving as U.S. senator and then vice president under Jackson from 1833 to 1837.[3][5] His presidency, however, was dominated by the Panic of 1837, a severe economic depression triggered by speculative credit expansion and Jackson's Specie Circular policy, which Van Buren addressed through the Independent Treasury System to insulate federal funds from unstable banks rather than pursuing direct government intervention or a national bank revival.[6] This principled adherence to limited federal powers, consistent with Jacksonian principles, preserved fiscal solvency but failed to alleviate widespread unemployment and bank failures, contributing to his landslide defeat in the 1840 election by William Henry Harrison.[6][2] Beyond his executive tenure, Van Buren remained influential, running unsuccessfully as the Free Soil Party nominee in 1848 on an anti-slavery expansion platform, reflecting his evolution toward opposition to territorial slavery extension while upholding constitutional limits on federal abolitionism.[3] Known as the "Little Magician" for his political maneuvering, Van Buren's career exemplified pragmatic coalition-building in an era of factional strife, though his handling of economic crisis underscored the tensions between ideological restraint and public demand for relief.[2]
Early Life
Family Background and Upbringing
Martin Van Buren was born on December 5, 1782, in the village of Kinderhook, Columbia County, New York, to Abraham Van Buren and Maria Hoes Van Alen.[7][8] His father, Abraham, operated a small farm and tavern, providing a modest livelihood in the rural Hudson Valley community.[2][9] Both parents descended from Dutch settlers, with forebears tracing back to early New Netherland colonists, making Van Buren part of the fifth generation of Dutch stock in the region.[10][4] As the third of five children born to Abraham and Maria, Van Buren grew up in a household shaped by his mother's prior marriage to Johannes Van Alen, which produced two half-brothers and one half-sister.[9] The family resided in a predominantly Dutch-speaking enclave where English was secondary, influencing Van Buren's early linguistic environment.[4] His upbringing involved assisting with farm chores and tavern duties, instilling practical habits amid the post-Revolutionary economic constraints of upstate New York.[2][11] Kinderhook's tight-knit, agrarian society, rooted in Dutch Reformed traditions, provided Van Buren with an initial exposure to local governance and community affairs, though his formal schooling remained limited during these years.[4] The family's adherence to Dutch customs persisted, reflecting the cultural insularity of the area even as American independence reshaped broader political landscapes.[10]Education and Entry into Law
Van Buren received his early education at Kinderhook's one-room village schoolhouse until age fourteen, an experience typical for rural boys of modest means in late eighteenth-century New York.[4] He later attended the Kinderhook Academy for further instruction, including brief studies in Latin.[12] Lacking college attendance—common for those without independent wealth or urban connections—Van Buren pursued law through the era's standard apprenticeship system, beginning in 1796 at age fourteen under Francis Sylvester, a Federalist lawyer and Yale graduate in Kinderhook.[4] [13] During his clerkship with Sylvester, Van Buren handled menial tasks by day while studying legal texts at night, a rigorous self-directed regimen that prepared him for practice amid the competitive New York bar.[4] In 1802, he relocated to New York City to complete his training under William P. Van Ness, a prominent attorney and political ally of Aaron Burr, gaining exposure to urban legal proceedings and state politics.[13] [14] Admitted to the New York bar in 1803 at age twenty, Van Buren returned to Kinderhook and established a law practice, initially partnering with his half-brother James I. Van Alen to build a clientele through local litigation and estate work.[4] [12] His early legal work focused on civil cases in Columbia County courts, laying the foundation for his rapid entry into county politics.[13]Rise in State Politics
New York Political Involvement
Van Buren commenced his political career in New York as a Democratic-Republican, securing appointment as surrogate of Columbia County in 1808, a judicial role he retained until 1813.[12] In 1812, leveraging his legal successes, he narrowly won election to the New York State Senate, defeating Federalist incumbent Elijah H. Dunbar by a margin of approximately 0.5 percent in Columbia County.[4] His advocacy for the War of 1812, including opposition to Federalist resistance, elevated his profile among party regulars.[15] Serving in the state senate from 1813 to 1820, Van Buren aligned with the Bucktail faction—a group of Democratic-Republicans distinguished by their practice of wearing bucktails in their hats as a symbol of defiance against elitism—who opposed the dominant Clintonian wing led by DeWitt Clinton.[4] The Bucktails prioritized party discipline, legislative control over patronage, and resistance to Clinton's canal policies and gubernatorial influence, fostering a disciplined cadre that challenged entrenched power structures through coordinated voting and media influence.[4] Van Buren commanded this faction, using it to dismantle Clinton loyalists, such as by engineering the 1817 legislative investigations into Clinton's administration that contributed to his temporary ouster as governor.[4] In 1816, following reelection to the senate, Van Buren was appointed state attorney general, a post he held until 1819, during which he prosecuted corruption cases and advised on wartime legalities, further solidifying his reputation for pragmatic administration.[12][4] His tenure emphasized strict enforcement against Federalist holdovers and fiscal reforms, aligning with Bucktail goals of centralizing party authority. By 1820, Van Buren's machine-like organization of Bucktail supporters had established the groundwork for the Albany Regency, a network exerting influence across state institutions despite his occasional absences.[13]Albany Regency and Machine Politics
The Albany Regency emerged in the early 1820s as an informal coalition of Democratic-Republican politicians in New York, centered in Albany and led by Martin Van Buren, who sought to consolidate power against rivals like DeWitt Clinton and the Clintonian faction.[4] Formed amid the post-War of 1812 fragmentation of the Republican Party, the group—initially known among insiders as the "Holy Alliance"—capitalized on Van Buren's organizational skills following his election to the U.S. Senate in 1821, allowing him to direct operations remotely through trusted lieutenants.[16] Key members included Benjamin F. Butler, Van Buren's private secretary and legal advisor; William L. Marcy, a state senator who later became governor; Silas Wright, a fiscal conservative and assemblyman; and Edwin Croswell, comptroller who managed patronage distribution.[4] [8] Central to the Regency's machine politics was the systematic use of patronage and the spoils system, whereby government appointments were allocated to loyal party members to enforce discipline and expand influence, a practice Van Buren refined from earlier Republican traditions but applied with unprecedented rigor.[17] The group controlled the Albany Argus newspaper as a propaganda organ, disseminating pro-Regency views and attacking opponents, while dominating legislative caucuses to select nominees and dictate policy.[8] This approach enabled victories such as the 1821 state constitutional convention, where Regency forces purged Clinton appointees from the Council of Appointment and secured Van Buren's senatorial seat despite lacking a statewide majority.[4] By prioritizing party loyalty over ideological purity, the Regency built a disciplined apparatus that outmaneuvered fragmented opposition, though critics like Thurlow Weed later decried it as corrupt for prioritizing job-trading over merit.[18] The Regency's influence extended beyond state borders, positioning Van Buren as a national architect of Jacksonian Democracy by exporting machine tactics to federal politics, including the promotion of Andrew Jackson in 1824 and the orchestration of the 1828 election strategy through disciplined state delegations.[17] It maintained dominance until the mid-1830s, facilitating Van Buren's governorship in 1828 and supporting Democratic nominees like Marcy in 1832 and Wright in 1844, but waned after 1838 amid economic shifts, the rise of Whig machines under Weed, and internal splits over issues like the Independent Treasury.[16] [19] Historians credit the Regency with pioneering modern party organization—emphasizing caucuses, media control, and patronage as tools for electoral success—but note its causal role in entrenching spoils-driven governance, which fueled corruption scandals and anti-machine reforms by the 1840s.[20][21]Governorship and U.S. Senate Service
Van Buren was elected to the United States Senate by the New York State Legislature in February 1821, representing New York as a Democratic-Republican.[22] During his tenure from March 4, 1821, to December 1828, he served on the Senate Finance Committee and chaired the Judiciary Committee, advancing his commitment to states' rights and limited federal authority in line with Jeffersonian principles.[4] He opposed President John Quincy Adams' agenda, including federal funding for internal improvements such as roads and canals, and resisted U.S. participation in the Panama Congress of 1826, viewing these as overreaches of national power that encroached on state sovereignty. In the Senate, Van Buren emerged as a key organizer of opposition to the Adams administration following the disputed 1824 election, forging alliances among anti-Adams forces to challenge what he and allies saw as a "corrupt bargain" between Adams and Henry Clay.[9] This effort contributed to the coalescence of Jacksonian Democrats, with Van Buren playing a pivotal role in coordinating support for Andrew Jackson's 1828 presidential bid, including strategic maneuvers like endorsing the controversial Tariff of 1828 to highlight sectional divisions and rally Southern discontent against Adams' policies. Reelected to the Senate amid growing anti-Adams sentiment, Van Buren prioritized party-building over specific legislative achievements, reflecting his view that structural political realignment was essential to counter federalist tendencies.[22] Anticipating Jackson's victory, Van Buren resigned his Senate seat in December 1828 to campaign for and win election as Governor of New York on November 5, 1828, defeating National Republican Francis Granger with 51.4% of the vote.[12] He assumed office on January 1, 1829, but his governorship lasted only until March 12, 1829—43 days—the shortest of any New York governor.[23] In this brief period, he endorsed banking reform measures aimed at stabilizing state institutions, including early steps toward what became the Safety Fund system to protect depositors amid post-War of 1812 financial vulnerabilities, though major implementation occurred under his successor.[12] Van Buren's prompt resignation followed President Jackson's appointment of him as Secretary of State on March 9, 1829, prioritizing national influence over state leadership and solidifying his position as Jackson's trusted advisor.[12] This transition underscored his pragmatic approach to power, leveraging New York control via the Albany Regency to maintain influence without prolonged gubernatorial service.[4]National Political Ascendancy
Alliance with Andrew Jackson
Following the disputed 1824 presidential election, in which Andrew Jackson received the plurality of both popular and electoral votes but lost the presidency to John Quincy Adams via House selection, Martin Van Buren pragmatically shifted his allegiance to Jackson as the leading figure opposing Adams' administration.[24] Previously aligned with William H. Crawford in 1824, Van Buren recognized Jackson's broad appeal among agrarian and working-class voters, viewing him as essential to countering the perceived elitism of Adams and Henry Clay.[23] By September 1827, Van Buren committed the influential Albany Regency—New York's Democratic-Republican machine under his influence—to Jackson's candidacy, establishing a critical North-South political alliance that bridged sectional divides.[7] This move solidified Van Buren's role as Jackson's northern strategist, leveraging his control over New York patronage and organization to mobilize support. The alliance emphasized strict party discipline, voter registration drives, and coordinated campaigning, innovations that transformed ad hoc factions into a modern political party structure.[3] In preparation for the 1828 election, Van Buren orchestrated the formation of the Democratic Party, co-founding it as a vehicle to propel Jackson's victory by unifying disparate anti-Adams elements under a common platform of limited government, states' rights, and opposition to the Second Bank of the United States.[17] He resigned his U.S. Senate seat in 1828 to run for governor of New York, securing the state's electoral votes for Jackson through targeted reforms and machine politics; Van Buren won the governorship on November 5, 1828, with Jackson carrying New York decisively.[23] This delivered 20 crucial electoral votes from the pivotal state, contributing to Jackson's triumph of 178 electoral votes to Adams' 83.[25] Jackson rewarded Van Buren's efforts by appointing him Secretary of State on March 6, 1829, positioning him as a chief advisor and de facto heir apparent within Jackson's informal "Kitchen Cabinet."[23] Van Buren supported Jackson's key initiatives, including the Eaton Affair resolution through his own resignation to facilitate cabinet reorganization, and advocated for party-building measures that enhanced Democratic cohesion.[26] By 1832, this alliance culminated in Van Buren's nomination as Jackson's vice presidential running mate at the Democratic National Convention in Baltimore on May 21–23, where he received unanimous support, underscoring the depth of their partnership.[22]1828 Election Role
In the aftermath of the 1824 presidential election, where Andrew Jackson received the plurality of both popular and electoral votes but lost the presidency to John Quincy Adams via what Jackson supporters termed a "corrupt bargain" in the House of Representatives, Martin Van Buren emerged as a pivotal architect of Jackson's 1828 comeback.[4] As a U.S. Senator from New York, Van Buren shifted his allegiance from the Crawford faction of the Democratic-Republicans to Jackson, viewing the general's popularity as the vehicle to restore Jeffersonian principles and defeat Adams's National Republican administration.[24] He actively worked to consolidate anti-Adams forces, including reconciling Jackson with Vice President John C. Calhoun and incorporating disaffected supporters of Henry Clay led by Thomas Hart Benton.[24] Van Buren's strategic genius lay in recognizing the need for a disciplined party apparatus, which he helped forge into the nascent Democratic Party to prosecute the 1828 campaign.[17] Drawing on his experience with New York's Albany Regency—a tightly knit political machine—he emphasized "party principle" over personal factions, organizing rallies, voter registration drives, and coordinated messaging that portrayed Jackson as the champion of the common man against elite corruption.[4] This marked a departure from the era's gentlemanly politics, introducing systematic mobilization that boosted turnout by approximately 800,000 voters nationwide compared to 1824, with Jackson securing 56% of the popular vote.[4] In New York, Van Buren's home-state efforts were decisive; he orchestrated the defeat of Adams's allies in the legislature and won the governorship on the same ballot as Jackson's national victory, held from October 31 to December 2, 1828, before resigning in 1829 to join Jackson's cabinet as Secretary of State.[4] Jackson triumphed with 178 electoral votes to Adams's 83, sweeping every state except New England strongholds, a result attributable in no small measure to Van Buren's coalition-building, which laid the groundwork for Democratic dominance in subsequent elections.[24]Secretary of State Tenure
Martin Van Buren was appointed Secretary of State by President Andrew Jackson on March 6, 1829, and took office on March 28, 1829.[23] He held the position until resigning on May 23, 1831, amid escalating cabinet divisions.[7] During this period, Van Buren prioritized resolving commercial disputes and indemnity claims inherited from prior administrations, conducting diplomacy without major international crises.[23] A primary success involved negotiations with Great Britain, culminating in an October 1830 convention that lifted restrictions on direct American trade with the British West Indies, a goal obstructed since the 1815 treaty revisions following the War of 1812.[23] [22] Van Buren also directed efforts to secure reparations from France for ship seizures and property damages during the Napoleonic Wars, known as spoliation claims; these advanced to a July 1831 treaty obligating France to pay 25 million francs (approximately $4.6 million), though ratification and payments faced delays until 1836.[23] [27] Additionally, under his oversight, U.S. envoys concluded a commercial treaty with the Ottoman Empire, granting American merchants access to Black Sea ports previously closed to foreigners.[23] Van Buren's resignation stemmed from irreconcilable cabinet rifts, exacerbated by the Petticoat Affair—the social exclusion of Secretary of War John Eaton's wife, Peggy, by spouses of other officials, including Vice President John C. Calhoun's wife.[26] By stepping down alongside pro-Calhoun members, Van Buren enabled Jackson to reconstitute the cabinet with loyalists, solidifying his own status as the president's heir apparent while avoiding direct entanglement in the scandal.[26] [7] This maneuver, though domestically motivated, concluded his formal foreign policy role without disrupting ongoing diplomatic initiatives.[23]
Vice Presidency and Election to Presidency
Ambassador to Britain and Vice Presidential Role
Following his resignation as Secretary of State on May 23, 1831, to enable President Andrew Jackson's cabinet restructuring amid the Petticoat affair, Van Buren received a recess appointment on June 23, 1831, as U.S. Minister Plenipotentiary to Great Britain, succeeding Louis McLane.[7] [22] He sailed from New York on August 16, 1831, arriving in London later that month, where he was received cordially by British officials despite underlying tensions over trade and maritime issues.[7] In London from September 1831 to early 1832, Van Buren pursued negotiations on reciprocal trade access to the British West Indies—blocked since 1826—and the settlement of American claims for spoliations during the Napoleonic Wars, though no binding agreements were concluded before his recall; these efforts built on prior U.S. diplomatic initiatives but were overshadowed by domestic U.S. politics.[23] Senate opponents, including allies of Vice President John C. Calhoun, criticized Van Buren's earlier instructions as Secretary of State to McLane on West Indies trade as overly conciliatory toward Britain, using them as pretext for opposition amid factional rifts within Jackson's administration.[23] The Senate formally rejected Van Buren's nomination on January 25, 1832, by an 18–18 tie, with Calhoun casting the deciding negative vote as president of the Senate; this marked the first rejection of a sitting cabinet member's diplomatic nomination and stemmed primarily from Calhoun's resentment over Van Buren's role in cabinet realignments and his alignment with Jackson against nullification advocates.[7] [22] The outcome, while a personal setback, transformed Van Buren into a martyr for Jacksonian Democrats, solidifying his loyalty to the president and positioning him as the administration's heir apparent by rallying party support against perceived intrigue.[28] Returning to the United States, Van Buren was unanimously nominated as Jackson's vice presidential running mate at the inaugural Democratic National Convention in Baltimore from May 21–23, 1832, replacing the estranged Calhoun and unifying northern and southern Democrats behind the ticket.[7] [22] The Jackson–Van Buren slate won the November 6, 1832, election decisively, garnering 219 electoral votes to 49 for National Republican candidates Henry Clay and John Sergeant, with popular vote totals of 687,502 (55 percent) for Jackson and corresponding support for Van Buren despite scattered electoral abstentions in some southern states.[29] [7] Inaugurated as vice president on March 4, 1833, Van Buren presided over the Senate for the first time on December 16, 1833, but cast no tie-breaking votes during his tenure; instead, he functioned as Jackson's closest confidential advisor, influencing legislation on the Bank War, distributing patronage to strengthen Democratic organization, and mediating intraparty disputes to ensure continuity for Jackson's agenda.[7] [22] This role amplified Van Buren's national stature, paving the way for his subsequent presidential nomination while highlighting the vice presidency's limitations under the era's party-driven politics.[23]1836 Presidential Campaign and Victory
The Democratic Party nominated incumbent Vice President Martin Van Buren as its presidential candidate at its national convention in Baltimore, Maryland, held from May 20 to 22, 1835, where he received unanimous support on the single ballot.[30] President Andrew Jackson's endorsement, viewing Van Buren as the faithful executor of his policies, solidified party backing and positioned the campaign as a referendum on Jacksonian democracy.[31] Van Buren paired with Senator Richard Mentor Johnson of Kentucky for vice president, emphasizing continuity in leadership.[31] Van Buren conducted a subdued campaign, consistent with contemporary norms that discouraged active presidential politicking, focusing instead on defending Jackson's record against the Second Bank of the United States and promoting an independent treasury system.[31] Democrats portrayed Van Buren as the defender of the common man against elite interests, leveraging Jackson's popularity from the bank veto and Indian removal policies. The opposition Whig Party, a coalition of National Republicans, Anti-Masons, and disaffected Democrats, eschewed a unified ticket to exploit regional divisions, nominating William Henry Harrison for much of the North and West, Hugh Lawson White for Southern states, and Daniel Webster for New England, with the explicit aim of denying Van Buren an electoral majority to shift the contest to the House of Representatives.[32][31] Elections occurred between November 3 and December 7, 1836, across the 26 states. Van Buren secured victory with 170 electoral votes from 15 states, exceeding the 148 needed for a majority out of 294 total electors, and captured 761,549 popular votes, or 50.8 percent of the 1,498,937 cast.[33][34] Harrison obtained 73 electoral votes and 549,518 popular votes (36.6 percent), White 26 electoral votes and 145,396 popular votes (9.7 percent), and Webster 14 electoral votes and 41,287 popular votes (2.7 percent).[33][34] Johnson fell short of a majority for vice president due to faithless Georgia electors, leading to a contingent election in the Senate on January 3, 1837, where he prevailed over Whig Francis Granger.[35] Van Buren's triumph affirmed Democratic dominance, though the split opposition foreshadowed future consolidation.[31]Presidency
Cabinet and Administration
Van Buren's cabinet upon inauguration on March 4, 1837, retained most members from Andrew Jackson's administration to ensure policy continuity and partisan loyalty among Democrats.[36][37] This approach minimized disruptions amid emerging economic pressures, though it limited fresh perspectives.[38]| Position | Initial Appointee (Term) | Key Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Secretary of State | John Forsyth (1837–1841) | Continued from Jackson; handled foreign relations including Texas and Canadian issues.[36] |
| Secretary of the Treasury | Levi Woodbury (1837–1841) | Retained; managed independent treasury proposals post-Panic of 1837.[37] |
| Secretary of War | Joel R. Poinsett (1837–1841) | Held position throughout; oversaw Second Seminole War and Indian removals.[37] |
| Attorney General | Benjamin F. Butler (1837–1838) | Resigned amid health issues; focused on legal defenses of administration policies.[39] |
| Postmaster General | Amos Kendall (1837–1840) | Jackson holdover; expanded postal network before resigning for private pursuits.[37] |
| Secretary of the Navy | Mahlon Dickerson (1837–1838) | Resigned; emphasized naval modernization amid coastal defenses.[39] |
Economic Policies and the Panic of 1837
Van Buren assumed the presidency on March 4, 1837, inheriting an economy strained by the policies of his predecessor, Andrew Jackson, including the veto of the Second Bank of the United States' recharter in 1832 and the subsequent transfer of federal deposits to state banks, which fueled speculative lending and inflation.[6] These measures, combined with rapid western land sales financed by easy credit—reaching $25 million in public land revenue by 1836—created a bubble vulnerable to contraction.[40] Van Buren adhered to Jacksonian hard-money orthodoxy, declining to revive a national bank or intervene to stabilize state institutions, viewing such actions as unconstitutional encroachments on fiscal independence.[6] The Panic of 1837 commenced on May 10, 1837, when prominent New York banks, depleted of gold and silver reserves, suspended conversion of notes to specie, triggering a chain reaction of failures across the country.[6] Key precipitating factors included the Specie Circular issued by Jackson on July 11, 1836, requiring payment for federal lands in gold or silver to curb speculation, which abruptly tightened liquidity as banks reliant on paper currency faced redemption pressures; a sharp decline in global cotton prices due to overproduction and British demand contraction; and the withdrawal of British capital infusions amid London's own financial strains.[41] By August, over 600 banks had failed or suspended operations, unemployment surged in urban centers like New York and Philadelphia, and commodity prices plummeted, initiating a depression that persisted until the mid-1840s with widespread foreclosures and business insolvencies reducing state bank assets by approximately 45 percent.[42] In response, Van Buren convened a special session of Congress on September 4, 1837, attributing the crisis primarily to unchecked state bank expansions and speculative excesses rather than federal policy failures, while vetoing proposals for federal relief loans or infrastructure spending that might expand executive power.[43] [6] He advocated the Independent Treasury system, formalized in the Act of July 4, 1840, which mandated that federal revenues be held in government vaults and disbursed by treasury agents, severing ties with private banks to prevent political favoritism and currency instability—though critics argued it exacerbated liquidity shortages by immobilizing funds.[6] This approach prioritized long-term fiscal separation over immediate stabilization, reflecting Van Buren's belief in limited government involvement in monetary affairs, but it drew Whig opposition for allegedly prolonging the downturn without addressing root credit imbalances.[44] The system's implementation coincided with further economic contraction, contributing to Van Buren's 1840 electoral defeat as public hardship intensified demands for banking reform.[45]Indian Removal Policies
Martin Van Buren, upon assuming the presidency in March 1837, continued the enforcement of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which authorized the relocation of Native American tribes from eastern lands to territories west of the Mississippi River.[23] This policy, initiated under Andrew Jackson, aimed to facilitate white settlement and resolve conflicts over land in the southeastern United States, with states like Georgia exerting pressure for removal.[46] Van Buren's administration prioritized the removal of the Cherokee, Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole tribes, treating treaties as binding despite tribal resistance and legal challenges.[47] The most notorious enforcement occurred with the Cherokee Nation, whose removal culminated in the Trail of Tears during 1838–1839. Following the Treaty of New Echota signed in 1835 by a minority Cherokee faction—despite opposition from Principal Chief John Ross—Van Buren ordered U.S. Army General Winfield Scott in May 1838 to round up approximately 16,000 Cherokees into stockades and camps in Georgia, Tennessee, and North Carolina.[48] The forced marches, spanning about 1,200 miles to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma), began in October 1838 and continued through harsh winter conditions into March 1839, resulting in an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 Cherokee deaths from disease, exposure, and starvation—representing roughly one-fourth of the relocating population. In his December 3, 1838, annual message to Congress, Van Buren described the relocation as a humane measure that had already succeeded with other tribes, claiming it prevented further violence and secured Cherokee lands west.[49] Van Buren's policies also sustained the Second Seminole War (1835–1842), a protracted and expensive conflict to remove Seminole resistance in Florida. The war, inherited from Jackson's term, involved U.S. forces employing scorched-earth tactics, including the use of bloodhounds to track Seminole fighters in the Everglades, under commanders like Zachary Taylor.[50] By 1840, the administration had spent over $20 million and mobilized thousands of troops, yet only partial removals were achieved, with many Seminoles remaining in Florida after Van Buren's departure from office.[6] These efforts reflected a federal commitment to removal for national expansion, though they incurred significant human and financial costs, with Seminole casualties numbering in the hundreds and U.S. military deaths exceeding 1,500.[51]Foreign Policy Challenges
Van Buren's foreign policy emphasized strict neutrality and avoidance of entanglement in European conflicts, continuing the tradition of non-interventionism while prioritizing domestic recovery from the Panic of 1837. A primary challenge arose from the Canadian rebellions of 1837–1838, which drew American sympathizers into border skirmishes with British forces, testing U.S. sovereignty and risking war with Britain. Van Buren instructed U.S. officials to enforce neutrality laws rigorously, deploying federal troops to the northern border to prevent filibustering expeditions that could provoke escalation.[52][23] The Caroline affair exemplified these tensions: on December 29, 1837, British colonial forces crossed the Niagara River into U.S. territory at Schlosser, New York, boarded the American-owned steamship Caroline—which had been supplying Canadian rebels—and set it ablaze, sending it over Niagara Falls; one American was killed in the raid. Van Buren protested the violation of U.S. neutrality and territorial integrity to the British government, demanding reparations, but simultaneously restrained American hotheads to avert broader conflict, viewing war as incompatible with his administration's economic priorities.[53][54] The incident strained relations until British officer Alexander McLeod, arrested in New York for alleged involvement in the killing, was tried and acquitted in 1841 under Van Buren's influence, which ensured due process and helped defuse the crisis without conceding to mob justice.[55] These episodes highlighted Van Buren's cautious diplomacy, as he leveraged negotiations through Secretary of State John Forsyth to maintain peace despite public pressure for retaliation; by prioritizing de-escalation, he prevented incidents from igniting full-scale war, though critics accused him of undue appeasement toward Britain.[52] Overall, Van Buren's handling preserved U.S. isolation from Old World quarrels, aligning with first principles of national self-interest amid internal vulnerabilities.[23]Texas Annexation Controversy
Following Texas's declaration of independence from Mexico on March 2, 1836, after its victory at San Jacinto, the Republic of Texas sought annexation to the United States as a means to secure recognition and economic stability.[56] In August 1837, Texas Minister to Washington Memucan Hunt formally proposed annexation negotiations to President Martin Van Buren, emphasizing Texas's strategic value and alignment with American interests.[57] Van Buren rejected the proposal, citing the absence of constitutional precedent for annexing a sovereign foreign state and the risk that such an action could be interpreted internationally as an act of aggression.[58] Van Buren's opposition stemmed primarily from the potential for war with Mexico, which had not recognized Texas's independence and had explicitly threatened military retaliation against annexation.[56] Mexico's ongoing claims to Texas territory, coupled with unresolved border disputes, made immediate incorporation a trigger for conflict that Van Buren sought to avoid through diplomatic channels, including U.S. recognition of Texas as an independent nation on March 3, 1837, without territorial integration.[59] Secondarily, annexation raised domestic sectional tensions, as Texas's constitution permitted slavery, threatening the fragile balance between free and slave states in Congress and galvanizing Northern opposition from abolitionists and Whigs who viewed it as an expansion of Southern influence. Van Buren, a Northern Democrat committed to party unity and Union preservation, prioritized these risks over expansionist pressures from Southern Democrats and his predecessor Andrew Jackson, who had favored annexation but deferred action.[60] The controversy intensified partisan divides within the Democratic Party, with Southern expansionists decrying Van Buren's caution as a betrayal of manifest destiny and slavery's interests, while Northern allies supported his restraint to avert civil discord.[61] In response to congressional inquiries, Van Buren issued a special message on December 21, 1837, outlining his position and urging delay until negotiations with Mexico could clarify boundaries and secure peace, though no treaty materialized during his term.[62] Texas, facing British and French overtures for recognition, withdrew its annexation offer in October 1838 under President Mirabeau B. Lamar, who prioritized independence over perceived U.S. ambivalence.[63] This episode eroded Van Buren's support among pro-slavery expansionists, contributing to Democratic fractures evident in the 1840 election, though his policy successfully forestalled war until after his presidency.[64]Canadian Border Disputes
The Canadian border disputes during Martin Van Buren's presidency arose from ambiguities in the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which defined the northeastern boundary between the United States and British North America imprecisely, particularly along the Maine-New Brunswick frontier and in areas like the Aroostook Valley.[61] These tensions escalated amid the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837, leading to incidents that tested U.S.-British relations. Van Buren prioritized diplomatic resolution and strict neutrality to prevent war, given the U.S.'s economic vulnerabilities following the Panic of 1837.[52] The Caroline affair, occurring on December 29, 1837, involved British colonial forces crossing into New York state to seize and destroy the American steamer Caroline, which had been supplying Canadian rebels on Navy Island near Niagara Falls.[54] President Van Buren protested the violation of U.S. sovereignty to the British government but refrained from military retaliation, instead issuing a neutrality proclamation on January 5, 1838, to curb American filibustering support for the rebels and maintain peaceful relations.[30] This response addressed public outrage while avoiding escalation; it also influenced the handling of Alexander McLeod, a British subject arrested in 1838 for alleged involvement in the incident, whose trial Van Buren's administration ensured was conducted fairly to defuse international pressure.[55] Further strain emerged in the Aroostook War of 1838–1839, a non-violent confrontation over logging rights in the disputed Aroostook River valley between Maine militiamen and New Brunswick forces.[61] Sparked by mutual arrests of timber trespassers in late 1838, the standoff prompted Maine to mobilize up to 10,000 troops and request federal intervention.[30] Van Buren dispatched Brigadier General Winfield Scott in February 1839 to the region, where Scott negotiated a truce on March 21, 1839, establishing joint occupancy of the territory pending diplomatic settlement.[61] This armistice averted bloodshed and deferred resolution to future negotiations, ultimately addressed in the 1842 Webster-Ashburton Treaty under President Tyler.[65] Van Buren's restraint preserved U.S. interests without provoking Britain, reflecting a pragmatic foreign policy amid domestic challenges.[52]Amistad Case and Judicial Interventions
In July 1839, the Spanish schooner La Amistad arrived off Long Island, New York, after its 53 African captives—primarily Mende people kidnapped from Sierra Leone—had revolted against their two Cuban enslavers, José Ruiz and Pedro Montes, killing the captain and cook while sparing the survivors.[66] The Africans, navigating northward under duress, were seized by U.S. authorities in Connecticut, prompting Spain's minister to demand their return to Cuba as property under the 1817 Anglo-Spanish Treaty against the slave trade, though the captives argued they had been illegally enslaved after an initial legal purchase in Cuba.[66] [67] President Van Buren's administration, facing diplomatic pressure from Spain and domestic pro-slavery interests in the South amid his weakened position post-Panic of 1837, directed federal prosecutors to assert custody over the Africans as de facto Spanish property, rejecting their status as free persons kidnapped in violation of international anti-slave trade agreements.[68] [66] In U.S. District Court, Judge Andrew Judson ruled on January 13, 1840, that the Africans were not slaves under Spanish or U.S. law, ordering their release and transport back to Africa at U.S. expense, a decision influenced by evidence of their illegal capture in Africa rather than birth as Cuban slaves.[69] [66] The Van Buren administration immediately appealed to the U.S. Circuit Court, where Judge Smith Thompson upheld Judson's ruling on appeal, prompting further escalation to the Supreme Court to enforce treaty obligations with Spain and preserve sectional balance on slavery, despite abolitionist opposition in the North that funded legal defenses for the Africans.[68] [69] This intervention exemplified executive influence over judicial proceedings, as Attorney General Felix Grundy and U.S. Attorney William Holabird advanced arguments prioritizing international comity and property rights over the captives' claims of freedom, though Van Buren personally avoided direct public endorsement to mitigate Northern backlash during his reelection bid.[70] [68] In the Supreme Court case United States v. The Amistad (1841), argued after Van Buren's term but appealed under his directive, the Court ruled 7-1 on March 9, 1841, affirming the lower courts by declaring the Africans free and subject only to salvage claims on the ship, not human restitution to Spain, with former President John Quincy Adams successfully countering administration arguments on natural rights and treaty interpretation.[66] [67] The decision underscored limits on executive intervention in judicial slavery disputes, though Van Buren's appeals delayed the Africans' return to Sierra Leone until November 1841, funded by abolitionist groups rather than federal resources.[68] [66] Beyond Amistad, Van Buren's judicial engagements were limited, primarily involving restrained responses to other slavery-related cases and refusals to override military courts-martial, reflecting his doctrine of non-interference except where foreign policy or sectional stability demanded action.[68]Judicial Appointments
During his presidency from March 4, 1837, to March 4, 1841, Martin Van Buren nominated two associate justices to the Supreme Court of the United States, both confirmed by the Senate, as part of efforts to maintain Democratic influence on the judiciary amid expanding court seats and vacancies.[71] These appointments prioritized southern Democrats to preserve sectional balance on the Court, reflecting Van Buren's commitment to Jacksonian principles and avoidance of overt partisanship in selections.[72] Van Buren's first Supreme Court nomination was John McKinley of Alabama on September 18, 1837, to a newly created seat authorized by the Judiciary Act of 1837, which increased the Court's size from seven to nine justices to accommodate growing circuit duties.[71] McKinley, a former U.S. senator and Alabama circuit judge who had supported Andrew Jackson's campaigns, received Senate confirmation by voice vote on September 25, 1837, and took office immediately.[71] He served until his death on July 19, 1852, contributing to opinions upholding states' rights in cases like Bank of Augusta v. Earle (1839).[73] The second nomination came amid a late-term vacancy: on February 26, 1841, Van Buren selected Peter V. Daniel of Virginia to replace Associate Justice Philip P. Barbour, who died that day.[71] Daniel, a former Virginia state judge and strict constructionist aligned with Jacksonian Democrats, emphasizing limited federal power and states' rights, was confirmed by the Senate on March 2, 1841, in a 25–5 vote.[71] He joined the Court on March 3, 1841, and served until his death on May 31, 1860, notably dissenting in Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) to defend state authority over fugitive slaves.[73] Beyond the Supreme Court, Van Buren nominated eight additional Article III judges to U.S. district and circuit courts, all confirmed without Senate rejection, for a total of ten successful federal judicial appointments.[73] Notable among these were brothers Mahlon Dickerson and Philemon Dickerson to the District of New Jersey, both Democrats with prior state judicial experience, and Samuel J. Gholson to the District of Mississippi, ensuring partisan reliability in key districts.[73] These selections underscored Van Buren's strategy of placing loyal Democrats in lower federal benches to sustain administrative continuity and resist emerging Whig opposition, though the short tenure limited their long-term doctrinal impact.[74]1840 Reelection Campaign and Defeat
Incumbent President Martin Van Buren secured the Democratic nomination for reelection at the party's May 1840 convention in Baltimore, receiving unanimous support on the first ballot alongside continuing Vice President Richard Mentor Johnson.[31] The platform emphasized Van Buren's Independent Treasury system as a safeguard against future financial panics and opposed Whig calls for a national bank, framing the contest as a defense of Jacksonian hard-money policies amid ongoing economic recovery efforts.[31] The Whig Party, unified after internal debates, nominated William Henry Harrison for president and John Tyler for vice president at their December 1839 convention in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, selecting Harrison over rivals like Henry Clay to capitalize on his War of 1812 heroism at Tippecanoe.[75] Whig strategists, led by figures such as Daniel Webster and Thurlow Weed, pioneered mass-appeal tactics including torchlight parades, campaign songs like "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too," and imagery portraying Harrison as a simple log-cabin dweller who drank hard cider—contrasting sharply with Van Buren, derided as an elitist "Little Magician" from Kinderhook allegedly indulging in White House luxuries like gold spoons, despite Van Buren's modest Dutch-American origins.[76] [77] These efforts, while exaggerating Harrison's frontier credentials (he was born to a prominent Virginia family), effectively mobilized voters by associating Van Buren with the Panic of 1837's lingering effects, including widespread bank failures, unemployment exceeding 10 percent in urban areas, and deflationary pressures from the Specie Circular.[78] Van Buren's campaign, adhering to traditional norms, avoided personal rallies and focused on defending his administration's fiscal restraint, arguing that the depression stemmed from speculative excesses predating his term and that Whig banking proposals risked repeating the Second Bank of the United States' abuses.[31] However, public discontent with slow recovery—evidenced by state debt defaults and farm foreclosures—dominated voter sentiment, amplified by Whig attacks blaming Van Buren's sub-treasury for contracting credit.[76] High turnout, fueled by expanded white male suffrage, reached about 80 percent, favoring Whigs in key Northern and Western states.[79] On November 3–4, 1840, Harrison secured victory with 234 electoral votes to Van Buren's 60, carrying 19 of 26 states; popular vote totals showed Harrison at 1,275,583 (52.9 percent) against Van Buren's 1,128,702 (46.8 percent), with minor third-party showings.[80] Van Buren's defeat reflected causal links between economic hardship—unemployment and price drops from 1837–1843—and voter rejection of his policies, rather than mere campaign novelty, though Whig organizational innovations boosted mobilization among less-engaged demographics.[81] Post-election, Van Buren conceded gracefully, later attributing the loss to "the hard times" in private correspondence, underscoring how inherited financial instability eroded Democratic support despite policy continuity with Jackson.[31]Post-Presidency Activities
1844 Democratic Nomination and Defeat
Following his defeat in the 1840 presidential election, Martin Van Buren retreated to his Kinderhook, New York estate but maintained influence within the Democratic Party through correspondence and alliances with figures like Andrew Jackson.[82] By early 1844, Van Buren positioned himself as the leading contender for the Democratic nomination, leveraging his past service and party loyalty despite lingering associations with the Panic of 1837.[82] His candidacy emphasized continuity with Jacksonian principles, including limited government intervention in the economy and opposition to Whig policies favoring a national bank.[83] A pivotal factor undermining Van Buren's prospects was his public stance on the annexation of Texas, articulated in an April 20, 1844 letter to South Carolina congressman William Henry Hammett.[84] In the letter, Van Buren acknowledged annexation's potential constitutionality under treaty or joint resolution but argued against pursuing it immediately, citing risks of war with Mexico, disruption to U.S.-British relations over shared interests in Oregon, and exacerbation of sectional tensions between slaveholding and free states.[64] The letter, intended privately but leaked and published in newspapers like the Washington Globe by May 1844, alienated Southern Democrats who viewed Texas annexation—potentially expanding slave territory—as essential for preserving sectional balance and countering abolitionist pressures.[64] [85] Northern expansionists and some party members favoring aggressive territorial growth also criticized the position as insufficiently bold, interpreting it as a concession to antislavery sentiment despite Van Buren's pro-Southern record on issues like Indian removal.[82] The Democratic National Convention convened in Baltimore, Maryland, from May 27 to May 30, 1844, requiring a two-thirds majority for nomination—a rule adopted in 1832 and retained to ensure broad consensus but which now disadvantaged frontrunners without unanimous regional support.[86] Van Buren secured a simple majority on the first ballot with 146 votes out of 249, far ahead of rivals like Lewis Cass (29 votes) and James Buchanan (4 votes), but fell short of the 166 needed for two-thirds.[87] Over nine ballots, his support fluctuated between 114 and 148 votes, held firm by Northern and loyal Jacksonian delegates but eroded by Southern defections unwilling to back a candidate seen as equivocating on Texas.[86] Van Buren's slate included nominating New York senator Silas Wright for vice president, which briefly rallied some delegates but failed to bridge the divide, as Wright shared Van Buren's caution on annexation.[87] The convention deadlock prompted a shift to compromise candidates, culminating on the ninth ballot when Tennessee's James K. Polk—previously a dark horse with negligible early support—emerged with 148 votes, securing the nomination by endorsing immediate Texas annexation while pledging to Oregon territorial claims.[88] Polk's selection reflected strategic party calculations to unify pro-annexation Southerners and expansionist Northerners against Whig nominee Henry Clay, whose own ambiguous Texas stance mirrored Van Buren's but lacked Democratic organizational strength.[85] Van Buren, though disappointed, instructed supporters to back Polk, prioritizing party unity over personal grievance; his endorsement helped Polk consolidate Democratic votes in the general election, which Polk won narrowly.[82] This nomination loss effectively ended Van Buren's viability as a major-party presidential contender, exposing fractures in Democratic coalitions over slavery's expansion and foreshadowing his later alignment with antislavery third-party efforts.[82]Free Soil Movement and 1848 Campaign
After failing to secure the Democratic presidential nomination in 1844 due to opposition to the annexation of Texas as a slave state, Martin Van Buren aligned with the Barnburner faction of the Democratic Party, which prioritized restricting slavery's expansion into western territories to preserve sectional balance and protect opportunities for free white labor.[89] This stance reflected Van Buren's long-held view that unchecked slavery growth threatened the Union by exacerbating North-South tensions and undermining the economic prospects of non-slaveholding farmers and workers.[90] The Barnburners, named derisively for their radical willingness to upend party orthodoxy akin to burning a barn to eliminate rats, supported the Wilmot Proviso—a proposed amendment to ban slavery in lands gained from Mexico—and bolted from the 1848 Democratic National Convention in Baltimore when delegates rejected it in favor of popular sovereignty on the issue.[89] Joining forces with anti-slavery Conscience Whigs and members of the Liberty Party, they helped form the Free Soil Party in 1848, a coalition dedicated to preventing slavery's extension without challenging its existence in existing states.[91] On August 9, 1848, at the Free Soil national convention in Buffalo, New York, delegates nominated Van Buren for president and Charles Francis Adams of Massachusetts for vice president, selecting him over initial preferences like John P. Hale to leverage his national stature and appeal to disaffected Democrats.[92] The party platform explicitly opposed slavery's introduction into federal territories, advocated for free government homesteads to small farmers, and endorsed internal improvements, encapsulated in the slogan "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Speech, Free Men."[93] [89] Van Buren's campaign focused on these principles, warning that slavery expansion would degrade free labor by fostering competition from coerced workers and incite disunion, though he maintained slavery's constitutional protection where established.[91] In the November 7, 1848, election, he garnered 291,501 popular votes—10.1 percent of the total—but secured no electoral votes, as Whig Zachary Taylor won with 163 electors and Democrat Lewis Cass took 127.[94] The Free Soil vote, concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest, primarily siphoned support from Cass, enabling Taylor's victory and demonstrating organized opposition to slavery's spread as a viable electoral force.[91] This effort foreshadowed the Republican Party's rise, though Van Buren returned to the Democrats in 1852 upon their adoption of stricter anti-expansion rhetoric.[89]Retirement and Final Years
Following his unsuccessful 1848 presidential bid with the Free Soil Party, Martin Van Buren withdrew from active political campaigning and returned to his estate, Lindenwald, in Kinderhook, New York, where he had resided intermittently since purchasing the property in 1839.[95][96] There, he pursued agricultural activities, listing himself as a "farmer" in the 1850 U.S. Census, though his efforts focused more on estate management than intensive farming.[97] Van Buren spent these years in relative seclusion, corresponding with political figures and entertaining occasional visitors, including dignitaries, while avoiding formal office-seeking.[98][82] In the early 1850s, Van Buren composed his autobiography and a historical inquiry into the origins of American political parties, reflecting on his career without publishing the works during his lifetime.[82] As sectional tensions escalated in the late 1850s, he maintained a Unionist stance, opposing Southern secession following Abraham Lincoln's 1860 election and advocating unsuccessfully for a constitutional convention to preserve national unity.[90] Van Buren lent verbal support to Lincoln's administration and the federal efforts to suppress rebellion, diverging from some former Democrats who sympathized with the Confederacy.[90] Van Buren died on July 24, 1862, at Lindenwald, at the age of 79, from bronchial asthma exacerbated by heart issues.[7][99] His passing occurred amid the ongoing Civil War, marking the end of a life that bridged the early republic and the sectional crisis.[100]Death and Burial
Martin Van Buren died on July 24, 1862, at his Kinderhook estate Lindenwald, aged 79 years and seven months, from bronchial asthma after a prolonged illness.[7][100] He passed at 2:00 a.m., surrounded by family including his son John and grandchildren.[100][7] His funeral occurred on July 27 at the Reformed Dutch Church in Kinderhook, with burial in the church's cemetery.[101] Van Buren was interred beside his wife Hannah Hoes Van Buren (d. 1819), parents Abraham and Maria Van Buren, and son Abraham Van Buren (d. 1836).[101][102] The site features a 15-foot granite obelisk erected over the family plot, located at the cemetery on Albany Avenue (now Kindertree Drive).[102] President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed a national day of mourning on the occasion of Van Buren's death.[103]Political Ideology and Views
Economic Philosophy and Opposition to National Bank
Martin Van Buren's economic philosophy emphasized limited federal involvement in monetary affairs, prioritizing sound currency backed by specie and the decentralization of banking to prevent monopolistic control and speculative excesses. Influenced by Jacksonian principles, he advocated for a strict construction of federal powers under the Constitution, viewing concentrated financial institutions as threats to republican liberty and prone to corruption by elite interests.[6] He distrusted paper money expansion, attributing economic instability to overextended credit and state bank lending fueled by federal deposits after the removal of government funds from the Second Bank of the United States in 1833.[45] Van Buren aligned closely with President Andrew Jackson's opposition to the Second Bank, supporting its veto of recharter legislation on July 10, 1832, which he regarded as an unconstitutional extension of federal authority favoring manufacturers and financiers over agrarian producers. As Jackson's vice president and secretary of state, he endorsed the bank's dissolution, arguing it concentrated undue economic power in a single institution not accountable to the people.[104] In his first annual message to Congress on December 5, 1837, he warned that entanglement of government funds with private banks had exacerbated the ongoing Panic of 1837, recommending a "divorce" between the federal treasury and banking institutions to safeguard public finances.[105] To implement this separation, Van Buren proposed the Independent Treasury System, which aimed to insulate federal revenues from commercial bank fluctuations by establishing government vaults for specie storage and transactions. Congress passed the measure on July 4, 1840, creating sub-treasuries in cities including New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C., where federal agents would handle collections, disbursements, and payments exclusively in gold or silver.[30] This system reflected his belief that government-operated banking would avoid the partiality and instability of private entities, as he stated in 1838 that a central bank under federal control would inevitably prioritize political interests over economic prudence.[6] Critics, including Whig opponents, contended it restricted credit availability and hindered recovery, leading to its repeal by Congress on August 13, 1841, though Van Buren maintained it promoted fiscal discipline amid recurring bank failures.[44]Stance on Slavery and Sectional Balance
Martin Van Buren viewed slavery as a "moral evil," a position he articulated in 1819 while active in New York state politics as a Bucktail Democrat.[68] Despite this, his political career emphasized pragmatic accommodation of Southern interests to sustain sectional equilibrium and Democratic Party cohesion, subordinating anti-slavery agitation to the preservation of national unity.[68] He cultivated alliances, such as linking New York's Albany Regency with Virginia's political apparatus, to secure Southern electoral support for Jacksonian candidates and policies.[68] Van Buren endorsed compromises that maintained parity between free and slave states in Congress, including the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state alongside Maine as a free state, thereby equalizing Senate representation at 12 states each.[106] As a U.S. senator from New York in the late 1820s, he aligned with efforts to avoid reopening slavery debates that could fracture the Union.[106] This federalist approach held that the Constitution precluded federal abolition in existing states or the District of Columbia without Southern consent, as interference would breach the sectional compact underpinning the federal government.[107] In 1836, as president-elect, Van Buren publicly opposed abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia against the wishes of slaveholding states, warning that such action "would destroy at once all confidence in the pledges given by the free States" and invite reciprocal Northern grievances.[107] During his vice presidency and administration (1833–1841), he backed congressional measures to suppress anti-slavery discourse, including a tie-breaking Senate vote to bar distribution of abolitionist materials via the postal system and support for the gag rule, which from 1836 automatically tabled petitions on slavery to avert inflammatory debates.[68][72] These steps reflected his calculation that unchecked abolitionism threatened Democratic unity and risked Southern secession, earning him the label of a "northern man with southern principles."[68] Van Buren's commitment to balance extended to territorial questions; he resisted Texas annexation during his 1844 presidential bid, arguing that incorporating a vast slaveholding republic would upset the delicate ratio of free and slave states, potentially igniting conflict over slavery's expansion.[106] This stance prioritized constitutional limits on federal power and the long-term stability of the Union over moral imperatives, viewing slavery's containment through mutual sectional restraint as essential to averting dissolution.[106]Federalism, States' Rights, and Party Organization
Van Buren championed a strict interpretation of federalism rooted in Jeffersonian principles, emphasizing limited national authority and robust states' rights to counter centralized power. He opposed expansive federal initiatives, such as the Second Bank of the United States, viewing them as encroachments on state sovereignty that favored elite interests over democratic majorities.[108] This stance aligned with his support for Andrew Jackson's veto of the bank's recharter in 1832, which Van Buren endorsed as a defense of constitutional boundaries against implied federal powers.[4] In practice, Van Buren's federalism prioritized state-level governance for local matters while upholding the Union against disunionist threats, as seen in his navigation of the Nullification Crisis of 1832–1833, where he backed Jackson's forceful tariff enforcement but favored compromise to preserve federal supremacy without undermining states' autonomy.[109] He regarded political parties not as threats to federalism but as essential "safeguards," enabling coordinated opposition to nationalist policies and ensuring sectional balances within a decentralized republic.[110] Van Buren's innovations in party organization transformed American politics by institutionalizing disciplined, mass-based structures that reinforced federalist principles. As leader of New York's Bucktail faction, he founded the Albany Regency in the early 1820s, an early political machine that centralized state party operations through patronage, conventions, and loyalty enforcement, serving as a prototype for national organization.[4] This Regency model emphasized grassroots mobilization and electoral discipline, allowing Democrats to compete effectively against Federalist remnants and nationalists.[111] Nationally, Van Buren orchestrated the Democratic Party's formation around 1828, forging alliances between Northern reformers and Southern planters to nominate Jackson and institutionalize party loyalty as a counterweight to elite cabals.[17] He promoted regular nominating conventions—first held in 1832—to democratize candidate selection and bind diverse state interests, viewing parties as mechanisms for resolving sectional disputes and engaging broader electorates without federal overreach.[109] This structure revived the two-party system, with Democrats upholding states' rights against Whig centralism, though Van Buren later subordinated strict states' rights rhetoric to Union preservation amid slavery tensions.[3]Legacy and Assessments
Contributions to American Political System
Martin Van Buren played a pivotal role in establishing the modern American two-party system by organizing the Democratic Party as a cohesive national entity following the fragmented election of 1824. Drawing from his experience leading the Albany Regency in New York, a disciplined political machine that emphasized party loyalty over personal factions, Van Buren coordinated alliances among Democratic-Republicans to back Andrew Jackson's 1828 presidential bid, transforming ad hoc coalitions into a structured organization capable of sustaining electoral competition.[3][5] This effort revived partisan politics based on policy platforms rather than elite personalities, countering the perceived corruption of the "Era of Good Feelings" under one-party dominance.[17] Van Buren innovated campaign practices by promoting national nominating conventions, with the Democratic Party holding its first in May 1832 in Baltimore to select presidential electors and affirm Jackson's renomination, setting a precedent for formalized delegate selection that democratized candidate choice within parties.[17] He also systematized patronage appointments to reward loyalists, fostering party discipline and enabling grassroots mobilization of non-elite voters through rallies, newspapers, and local committees, which expanded voter participation beyond property-holding classes in states like New York by the 1830s.[112] These mechanisms solidified the "second party system," pitting Democrats against emerging Whigs in structured contests that emphasized ideological divides, such as states' rights versus federal activism.[113] His emphasis on federalism and opposition to centralized power, including resistance to a national bank, reinforced party identities tied to constitutional principles, influencing long-term norms of competitive elections and legislative bargaining.[108] By prioritizing organized partisanship, Van Buren shifted American politics from deference to elites toward mass engagement, though this also entrenched machine-style governance that prioritized loyalty over merit in appointments.[17] Scholars credit these developments with laying the foundation for enduring democratic institutions, as they institutionalized opposition and accountability in governance.[3]Criticisms of Economic and Native American Policies
Van Buren's economic policies faced sharp rebuke for their perceived rigidity amid the Panic of 1837, which erupted on May 10, 1837, when major New York banks suspended specie payments after exhausting gold and silver reserves, triggering widespread bank failures, unemployment exceeding 33% in urban areas, and a contraction in economic activity that persisted through his term.[6][114] Critics, including Whig opponents and affected business interests, faulted him for adhering to Jacksonian principles against federal intervention, rejecting proposals for a new national bank or direct relief measures like suspending the Specie Circular, which they argued deepened the depression by limiting credit and failing to stabilize currency.[6][45] His establishment of the Independent Treasury system on July 4, 1840, intended to sequester federal funds from state banks to prevent political favoritism and inflation, was decried by contemporaries as exacerbating liquidity shortages and deflation, since it withdrew government deposits from circulation without injecting new capital into the economy, thereby prolonging hardship for debtors and state institutions reliant on those funds.[6][115] Banking advocates and fiscal conservatives labeled the policy doctrinaire, noting its reversal of Jackson's pet bank deposits yet failure to address root causes like over-speculation in land and cotton, with the system's later repeal in 1841 underscoring its unpopularity.[6][116] ![Seminole War in Everglades][float-right] Van Buren's Native American policies elicited enduring criticism for vigorously executing the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which he had supported as Jackson's secretary of state, resulting in the displacement of tens of thousands from southeastern territories and high mortality rates during enforced migrations.[6][117] During his presidency, federal agents under his authorization rounded up approximately 16,000 Cherokee in 1838, marching them westward in what became known as the Trail of Tears, where an estimated 4,000 perished from dysentery, pneumonia, exposure, and malnutrition amid inadequate provisions and winter conditions.[117][46] Detractors, including missionary Samuel Worcester and abolitionist editor Horace Greeley, condemned the administration's disregard for the Supreme Court's 1832 Worcester v. Georgia ruling affirming Cherokee sovereignty, as Van Buren—echoing Jackson's stance—declined enforcement, prioritizing white settler expansion and claiming removal averted inevitable conflict, though empirical outcomes revealed catastrophic human costs without resolving land disputes.[6][117] Similarly, his handling of the Second Seminole War (1835–1842) drew ire for escalating military commitment, rejecting Osceola-led peace overtures, and insisting on total removal to Oklahoma Territory despite guerrilla resistance in Florida's swamps, incurring over $40 million in expenditures by 1842—equivalent to 15 times the annual federal budget—and more than 1,500 U.S. troop deaths from combat and disease.[6][9] Critics argued this approach, framed by Van Buren as defensive against Seminole raids like the 1836 Cooley Massacre, squandered resources on a protracted conflict that ultimately relocated only a fraction of the tribe while fueling resentment and fiscal strain, with no strategic gains justifying the toll.[6][118]Evaluations of Slavery and Union Preservation Efforts
Martin Van Buren's approach to slavery emphasized non-interference by the federal government in state institutions, a position he articulated in his 1837 inaugural address by affirming that Congress lacked authority to regulate slavery within the states where it existed.[119] This stance, rooted in his commitment to federalism and states' rights, aimed to prevent sectional discord from fracturing the Union, as he viewed federal overreach on domestic institutions as a threat to national cohesion.[106] During his presidency, Van Buren supported the congressional gag rule, which tabled anti-slavery petitions to avoid inflaming debates, thereby prioritizing legislative stability over immediate moral confrontations.[72] In the 1839 Amistad case, the Van Buren administration argued before the Supreme Court for returning the African captives to Spanish authorities under treaty obligations, a decision critics later interpreted as deference to pro-slavery interests, though it aligned with his broader policy of upholding international law to avert foreign policy crises that could destabilize the Union.[120] Historians have evaluated this era of Van Buren's leadership as a pragmatic effort to maintain sectional balance, delaying overt conflict by rejecting proposals like the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, which he deemed unconstitutional and likely to provoke slaveholding states.[119] Such compromises, while preserving the Union temporarily amid growing abolitionist pressures, have drawn criticism for suppressing discourse and enabling slavery's persistence, potentially exacerbating long-term divisions.[68] Post-presidency, Van Buren opposed the 1844 annexation of Texas, warning in correspondence that incorporating it as a slave state would upset the delicate equilibrium of free and slave territories established by the Missouri Compromise of 1820, thereby risking dissolution of the Union.[106] His 1848 nomination by the Free Soil Party marked a shift toward explicit opposition to slavery's territorial expansion, with the platform declaring that slavery in existing states depended solely on state laws and calling for its exclusion from western territories to safeguard free labor and republican institutions.[93] Though the campaign secured no electoral votes and only about 10% of the popular vote on October 10, 1848, it elevated anti-extension sentiments nationally, contributing to the ideological realignment that intensified sectional tensions while underscoring Van Buren's evolution from strict non-intervention to containment as a means of Union preservation.[89] Evaluations of these efforts highlight Van Buren's role in sustaining the Union through calculated restraint, as his policies forestalled immediate rupture by accommodating Southern interests without endorsing slavery's moral legitimacy, a approach informed by his New York origins and personal manumission of enslaved individuals in his household.[119] However, detractors argue that his early deference prolonged the institution's lifespan, with the Free Soil venture seen as too late and insufficiently abolitionist, ultimately aiding Zachary Taylor's victory and the Compromise of 1850's fragile truce.[68] Empirical assessments note that Van Buren's containment strategy mirrored first-principles federalism, prioritizing constitutional limits over radical reform to avert civil war until economic and demographic shifts rendered compromise untenable, though institutional biases in modern historiography often undervalue such delay tactics in favor of activist narratives.[120]Historical Rankings and Modern Reappraisals
In presidential historian surveys, Martin Van Buren has consistently ranked in the lower third of U.S. presidents. The C-SPAN Survey of Presidential Leadership, conducted among historians and scholars, placed him 34th overall in both its 2021 and 2017 editions, with a total score of 455 out of 1,000 in 2021, reflecting low marks in crisis leadership (ranked 35th) and economic management (ranked 40th).[121] Earlier C-SPAN surveys ranked him slightly higher at 31st in 2009 and 30th in 2000.[122] The Siena College Research Institute's 2022 survey similarly positioned him at 25th overall, an improvement from 26th in prior iterations, though he scored poorly in integrity (37th) and executive ability (36th).[123] These rankings attribute his low standing primarily to his administration's response to the Panic of 1837, which saw widespread bank failures, unemployment exceeding 10% in urban areas, and a six-year depression, with critics faulting his refusal to expand federal intervention or support state relief efforts.[124]| Survey | Year | Overall Rank (out of 45) |
|---|---|---|
| C-SPAN Historians Survey | 2021 | 34th[121] |
| C-SPAN Historians Survey | 2017 | 34th[122] |
| Siena College Research Institute | 2022 | 25th[123] |
| Siena College Research Institute | 2018 | 25th[125] |