Hubbry Logo
Third Party SystemThird Party SystemMain
Open search
Third Party System
Community hub
Third Party System
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Third Party System
Third Party System
Third Party System
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Third Party System
← Second 1856–1896 Fourth →
United States presidential election tendencies summarized between 1860 and 1892. Blue shaded states usually voted for the Democratic Party, while red shaded states usually voted for the Republican Party. Green shaded states voted in their first presidential election for the Populist Party.

The Third Party System was a period in the history of political parties in the United States from the 1850s until the 1890s, which featured profound developments in issues of American nationalism, modernization, and race. This period was marked by the American Civil War (1861–1865), the Emancipation Proclamation and the end of slavery in the United States, followed by the Reconstruction era and the Gilded Age.

It was dominated by the new Republican Party, which claimed success in saving the Union, abolishing slavery and enfranchising the freedmen, while adopting many Whig-style modernization programs such as national banks, railroads, high tariffs, homesteads, social spending (such as on greater Civil War veteran pension funding), and aid to land grant colleges. While most elections from 1876 through 1892 were extremely close, the opposition Democrats won only the 1884 and 1892 presidential elections (the Democrats also won the popular vote in the 1876 and 1888 presidential elections, but lost the electoral college vote), though from 1875 to 1895 the party usually controlled the United States House of Representatives and controlled the United States Senate from 1879 to 1881 and 1893 to 1895. Indeed, scholarly work and electoral evidence emphasizes that after the 1876 election the South's former slave centers, which before the emancipation of Republican-voting African Americans was electorally dominated by wealthy slave owners who made up the southern base of Whigs, Know Nothings and Constitutional Unionists, began realigning into the Democratic Party due to the end of the now unpopular Reconstruction efforts;[1] this new electoral base for the Democrats would finish realigning around 1904.

The other realignments that ushered in this party system were the realignment of the Free Soil movement into the Republican Party in 1856, which allowed the party to dominate the North, and the realignment of the more northern portion of Whigs, Know Nothings and Constitutional Unionists along the coastal Midatlantic into the Democratic Party after 1864. These realignments allowed the GOP to become the majority party, but with rather weak electoral support in Congress and the electoral college, for the next 36 years, especially after the mid-1870s. The Republican Party would heavily strengthen its electoral power due to an additional Republican realignment in the 1896 election.

The northern and western states were largely Republican, except for the closely balanced New York, Indiana, New Jersey, and Connecticut. After 1876, as a result of the end of Reconstruction, the Democratic Party took control of the "Solid South".[2]

Voter behavior

[edit]

As with the preceding Second Party System era, the Third was characterized by intense voter interest, routinely high voter turnout, unflinching party loyalty, dependence on nominating conventions, hierarchical party organizations, and the systematic use of government jobs as patronage for party workers, known as the spoils system. Cities of 50,000 or more developed ward and citywide "bosses" who could depend on the votes of clients, especially recent immigrants. Newspapers continued to be the primary communication system, with the great majority closely linked to one party or the other.[3]

Broad coalitions from each party

[edit]

Both parties consisted of broad-based voting coalitions. Throughout the North, businessmen, shop owners, skilled craftsmen, clerks and professionals favored the Republicans, as did more modern, commercially oriented farmers. In the South, the Republicans won strong support from the freedmen (newly enfranchised African Americans), but the party was usually controlled by local whites ("scalawags") and opportunistic Yankees ("carpetbaggers"). The race issue pulled the great majority of white southerners into the Democratic Party as Redeemers.

The Democratic Party was dominated by conservative, pro-business Bourbon Democrats, who usually controlled the national convention from 1868 until their great defeat by William Jennings Bryan in 1896. The Democratic coalition was composed of traditional Democrats in the North (many of them former Copperheads). They were joined by the Redeemers in the South and by Catholic immigrants, especially Irish-Americans and German-Americans. In addition, the party attracted unskilled laborers and hard-scrabble old-stock farmers in remote areas of New England and along the Ohio River valley.[4]

Religion: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats

[edit]
Main article: Ethnocultural politics in the United States

Religious lines were sharply drawn.[5] Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists in the North were tightly linked to the Republicans. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and German Lutherans, looked to the Democratic Party for protection from pietistic moralism and prohibition. While both parties cut across economic class structures, the Democrats were supported more heavily by the lower economic tiers.[6]

Cultural issues, especially prohibition and public-funding for Catholic schools (as well as non-English schools of both Protestant and Catholic denominations) in parity with what were at the time Protestant-based, English-language public schools, became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, about 50% of the voters were pietistic Protestants who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such as drinking. Liturgical churches constituted over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of personal morality issues. Prohibition debates and referendums heated politics in most states over a period of decades, and national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (repealed in 1932), serving as a major issue between the largely wet Democrats and the largely dry Republicans – although there was a pro-Prohibition faction within the Democratic Party and an anti-Prohibition faction within the Republican Party.[5]

Voting behavior by religion, northern USA late 19th century
Religion % Dem % Rep
Immigrants
Irish Catholics 80 20
All Catholics 70 30
Confessional German Lutherans 65 35
German Reformed 60 40
French Canadian Catholics 50 50
Less Confessional German Lutherans 45 55
English Canadians 40 60
British Stock 35 65
German Sectarians 30 70
Norwegian Lutherans 20 80
Swedish Lutherans 15 85
Haugean Norwegians 5 95
Natives
Northern Stock
Quakers 5 95
Free Will Baptists 20 80
Congregational 25 75
Methodists 25 75
Regular Baptists 35 65
Blacks 40 60
Presbyterians 40 60
Episcopalians 45 55
Southern Stock
Disciples 50 50
Presbyterians 70 30
Baptists 75 25
Methodists 90 10
Source: Paul Kleppner, The Third Electoral System 1853–1892 (1979) p. 182

Realignment in the 1850s

[edit]

The Republican Party emerged from the great political realignment of the mid-1850s. William Gienapp argues that the great realignment of the 1850s began before the Whig party demise, and was caused not by politicians but by voters at the local level. The central forces were ethno-cultural, involving tensions between pietistic Protestants versus liturgical Catholics, Lutherans and Episcopalians regarding Catholicism, prohibition, and nativism. Various prohibitionist and nativist movements emerged, especially the American Party, based originally on the secret Know Nothing lodges. It was a moralistic party that appealed to the middle-class fear of corruption—identifying that danger with Catholics, especially the recent Irish immigrants who seemed to bring crime, corruption, poverty and bossism as soon as they arrived. Anti-slavery did play a role but it was less important at first. The Know Nothing party embodied the social forces at work, but its weak leadership was unable to solidify its organization, and the Republicans picked it apart. Nativism was so powerful that the Republicans could not avoid it, but they did minimize it and turn voter wrath against the threat that slave owners would buy up the good farm lands wherever slavery was allowed. The realignment was so powerful because it forced voters to switch parties, as typified by the rise and fall of the Know Nothings, the rise of the Republican Party, and the splits in the Democratic Party during the transitional period of 1854–1858.[7] The Republican Party was more driven, in terms of ideology and talent; it surpassed the hapless American Party in 1856. By 1858 the Republicans controlled majorities in every Northern state, and hence controlled the electoral votes for president in 1860.[8][9][10]

Ideology

[edit]

The ideological force driving the new party was modernization, and opposition to slavery, that anti-modern threat. By 1856 the Republicans were crusading for "Free Soil, Free Labor, Frémont and Victory." The main argument was that a 'Slave Power' had seized control of the federal government and would try to make slavery legal in the territories, and perhaps even in the northern states. That would give rich slave owners the chance to go anywhere and buy up the best land, thus undercutting the wages of free labor and destroying the foundations of civil society. The Democratic response was to countercrusade in 1856, warning that the election of Republican candidate John C. Frémont would produce civil war. The outstanding leader of the Democrats was Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas; he believed that the democratic process in each state or territory should settle the slavery question. When President James Buchanan tried to rig politics in Kansas Territory to approve slavery, Douglas broke with him, presaging the split that ruined the party in 1860. That year, northern Democrats nominated Douglas as the candidate of democracy, while the southern wing put up John Breckinridge as the upholder of the rights of property and of states' rights, which in this context meant slavery. In the South, ex-Whigs organized an ad hoc "Constitutional Union" Party, pledging to keep the nation united on the basis of the Constitution, regardless of democracy, states' rights, property or liberty. The Republicans played it safe in 1860, passing over better-known radicals in favor of a moderate border-state politician known to be an articulate advocate of liberty. Abraham Lincoln made no speeches, letting the party apparatus march the armies to the polls. Even if all three of Lincoln's opponents had formed a common ticket–quite impossible in view of their ideological differences–his 40 percent of the vote was enough to carry the North and thus win the electoral college.[11]

Civil War

[edit]

It was the measure of genius of President Lincoln not only that he won his war but that he did so by drawing upon and synthesizing the strengths of anti-slavery, free soil, democracy, and nationalism.[12] The Confederacy abandoned all party activity, and thereby forfeited the advantages of a nationwide organization committed to support of the administration. In the Union, the Republican Party unanimously supported the war effort, finding officers, enlisted men, enlistment bonuses, aid to wives and widows, war supplies, bond purchases, and the enthusiasm that was critical to victory. The Democrats at first supported a war for Union, and in 1861 many Democratic politicians became colonels and generals. Announced by Lincoln in September 1862, the Emancipation Proclamation was designed primarily to destroy the economic base of the 'Slave Power'. It initially alienated many northern Democrats and even moderate Republicans. They were reluctant to support a war for the benefit of what they considered an inferior race. The Democrats made significant gains in the 1862 midterm elections, but the Republicans remained in control with the support of the Unionist Party. Success on the battlefield (especially the fall of Atlanta) significantly bolstered the Republicans in the election of 1864. The Democrats attempted to capitalize on negative reactions to the Emancipation, but by 1864 these had faded somewhat due to its success in undermining the South. Additionally, the Republicans made charges of treason against 'Copperheads' a successful campaign issue. Increasingly the Union Army became Republican in its makeup; probably a majority of Democrats who enlisted marched home Republican, including such key leaders as John Logan and Ben Butler.[13]

Glossary

[edit]

In the immediate aftermath of the war, there were several party subdivisions into which politicians might have been categorized:[14]

  • Unionists, or Union Republicans - Republicans who had been Union/federal/Lincoln-aligned throughout the American Civil War[14]
  • Radicals, or Radical Republicans - Republicans "who desired to impose severe conditions" on the South prior to their readmission,[14] and/or that insisted that re-enfranchisement of ex-Confederates take a backseat to "negro suffrage" - the stereotypical Radical was from New England or New York, or perhaps the Upper Midwest, and would have been considered a damnedest of Yankees south of the Mason-Dixon (Examples: Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner)
  • Conservatives, or Conservative Unionists - Opponents to the Radicals within the Republican Party, who "believed that a conciliatory course should be taken" toward whites of the late rebel states[14]
  • Copperheads - "northern Democrats who opposed the War"[14] (Example: Clement Vallandingham)
  • War Democrats - "Democrats who joined with the Union Party to put down the Rebellion"[14] (Example: Andrew Johnson)
  • Southern Unionist - not necessarily a political label, per se, but something like a mirror of the Copperhead: a southerner who supported the U.S. government during war. (Example: Parson Brownlow, a Whig until the collapse of that party)

Postbellum

[edit]

The Civil War and Reconstruction issues polarized the parties until the Compromise of 1877 finally ended the political warfare. War issues resonated for a quarter century, as Republicans waved the "bloody shirt" (of dead union soldiers), and Democrats warned against non-existent "Black supremacy" in the South and plutocracy in the North. The modernizing Republicans who had founded the party in 1854 looked askance at the perceived corruption of Ulysses S. Grant and his war veterans, bolstered by the solid vote of freedmen. The dissenters formed a "Liberal Republican" Party in 1872, only to have it smashed by Grant's reelection. By the mid-1870s it was clear that Confederate nationalism was dead; all but the most ardent Republican 'Stalwarts' agreed that the southern Republican coalition of African-American freedmen, scalawags and carpetbaggers was helpless and hopeless. In 1874 the Democrats won big majorities in Congress, with economic depression a major issue. People asked how much longer the Republicans could use the Army to impose control in the South.[2]

An 1881 cartoon attacking the imperial splendor of Garfield's inauguration in contrast to Jefferson's republican simplicity (upper left)

Rutherford Hayes became president after a highly controversial electoral count, demonstrating that the corruption of Southern politics threatened the legitimacy of the presidency itself. After Hayes removed the last federal troops in 1877, the Republican Party in the South sank into oblivion, kept alive only by the crumbs of federal patronage. It would be forty years before a Republican would win a former Confederate state in a presidential election.[15]

Climax and collapse, 1890–1896

[edit]
This article is part of a series on
Gilded Age
History
Presidents
Events
Third parties
Organizations
Federal Legislation
Culture
People
Oligarchs
Reformers
Other
flag United States portal

New issues emerged in the late 1880s, as Grover Cleveland and the Bourbon Democrats made the low tariff "for revenue only" a rallying cry for Democrats in the 1888 election, and the Republican Congress in 1890 legislated high tariffs and high spending. At the state level moralistic pietists pushed hard for prohibition, and in some states for the elimination of foreign-language schools serving German immigrants. The Bennett Law in Wisconsin produced a bruising ethnocultural battle in that state in 1890, which the Democrats won. The millions of postwar immigrants divided politically along ethnic and religious lines, with enough Germans moving into the Democratic Party to give the Democrats a national majority in 1892. Party loyalties were starting to weaken, as evidenced by the movement back and forth of the German vote and the sudden rise of the Populists. Army-style campaigns of necessity had to be supplemented by "campaigns of education", which focused more on the swing voters.[16]

Democratic magazine ridicules Republican use of "bloody shirt" memories of war

Cleveland's second term was ruined by a major depression, the Panic of 1893, which also undercut the appeal of the loosely organized Populist coalitions in the south and west. A stunning Republican triumph in 1894 nearly wiped out the Democratic Party north of the Mason–Dixon line. In the 1896 election William Jennings Bryan and the radical silverites seized control of the Democratic Party, denounced their own president, and called for a return to Jeffersonian agrarianism (see Jeffersonian democracy). Bryan, in his Cross of Gold speech, talked about workers and farmers crucified by big business, evil bankers and the gold standard. With Bryan giving from five to 35 speeches a day throughout the Midwest, straw polls showed his crusade forging a lead in the critical Midwest. Republicans William McKinley and Mark Hanna then seized control of the situation; their countercrusade was a campaign of education making lavish use of new advertising techniques. McKinley warned that Bryan's bimetallism would wreck the economy and achieve equality by making everyone poor. McKinley promised prosperity through strong economic growth based on sound money and business confidence, and an abundance of high-paying industrial jobs. Farmers would benefit by selling to a rich home market. Every racial, ethnic and religious group would prosper, and the government would never be used by one group to attack another. In particular McKinley reassured the German-Americans, alarmed on the one hand by Bryan's inflation and on the other by prohibition. McKinley's overwhelming victory combined city and farm, Northeast and Midwest, businessmen and factory workers. He carried nearly every city of 50,000 population, while Bryan swept the rural South (which was off-limits to the Republicans) and Mountain states. McKinley's victory, ratified by an even more decisive reelection in 1900, thus solidified one of the central ideologies of twentieth-century American politics, pluralism.[16]

Campaigning changes in 1896

[edit]

By campaigning tirelessly with over 500 speeches in 100 days, William Jennings Bryan seized control of the headlines in the 1896 election. It no longer mattered as much what the editorial page said—most newspapers opposed him—as long as his speeches made the front page. Financing likewise changed radically. Under the Second and Third Party Systems, parties financed their campaigns through patronage; now civil service reform was undercutting that revenue, and entirely new, outside sources of funding became critical. Mark Hanna systematically told nervous businessmen and financiers that he had a business plan to win the election, and then billed them for their share of the cost. Hanna spent $3.5 million in three months for speakers, pamphlets, posters, and rallies that all warned of doom and anarchy if Bryan should win, and offered prosperity and pluralism under William McKinley. Party loyalty itself weakened as voters were switching between parties much more often. It became respectable to declare oneself an 'independent'.[17]

Third Parties

[edit]

Throughout the nineteenth century, third parties such as the Prohibition Party, Greenback Party and the Populist Party evolved from widespread antiparty sentiment and a belief that governance should attend to the public good rather than partisan agendas. Because this position was based more on social experiences than any political ideology, nonpartisan activity was generally most effective on the local level. As third-party candidates tried to assert themselves in mainstream politics, however, they were forced to betray the antiparty foundations of the movement by allying with major partisan leaders. These alliances and the factionalism they engendered discouraged nonpartisan supporters and undermined the third-party movement by the end of the nineteenth century. Many reformers and nonpartisans subsequently lent support to the Republican Party, which promised to attend to issues important to them, such as anti-slavery or prohibition.[18]

Fourth Party System, 1896–1932

[edit]
Main article: Fourth Party System

The overwhelming Republican victory in 1896, which was repeated in 1900, restored business confidence, began three decades of prosperity for which the Republicans took credit, and swept away the issues and personalities of the Third Party System.[19] The period 1896–1932 can be called the Fourth Party System. Most voting blocs continued unchanged, but others realigned themselves, giving a strong Republican dominance in the industrial Northeast, though the way was clear for the Progressive Era to impose a new way of thinking and a new agenda for politics.[20]

Alarmed at the new rules of the game for campaign funding, the Progressives launched investigations and exposures (by the 'muckraker' journalists) into corrupt links between party bosses and business. New laws and constitutional amendments weakened the party bosses by installing primaries and directly electing senators. Theodore Roosevelt shared the growing concern with business influence on government. When William Howard Taft appeared to be too cozy with pro-business conservatives in terms of tariff and conservation issues, Roosevelt broke with his old friend and his old party. After losing the 1912 Republican nomination to Taft, he founded a new "Bull Moose" Progressive Party and ran as a third candidate. Although he outpolled Taft (who won only two states) in both the popular vote and the electoral college, the Republican split elected Woodrow Wilson and made pro-business conservatives the dominant force in the Republican Party.[21]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Third Party System

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Third Party System was the phase of from 1854 to 1896, marked by the ascendancy of the Republican Party—formed in opposition to the expansion of —as the dominant force alongside the Democratic Party, following the disintegration of the Whig Party and amid escalating national divisions over and territorial organization. This era encompassed the Republican capture of the presidency in 1860 with Abraham Lincoln's election, precipitating the Civil War (1861–1865), during which the party solidified its commitment to preserving the Union and abolishing through the and the Thirteenth Amendment. Postwar Reconstruction (1865–1877) saw Republicans enforce civil rights protections for freed slaves via the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and federal oversight in the South, though these efforts faced violent resistance from Democratic-aligned groups like the and waned with the , which resolved the disputed Hayes-Tilden election by withdrawing federal troops. The subsequent (c. 1870s–1890s) featured intense partisan competition, with Republicans generally advocating protective tariffs, monetary policy, and industrial expansion, while Democrats emphasized , lower tariffs, and agrarian interests, amid widespread corruption in party machines and scandals such as Crédit Mobilier and the . Defining characteristics included exceptionally high exceeding 80% in many elections, the persistence of sectional voting patterns—Republicans strong in the North and West, Democrats in the —and the influence of third parties like the Greenback and Populist movements, which pressured major parties on issues such as currency and railroad but rarely disrupted the two-party duopoly. The system's close contests, including three presidential elections decided by narrow margins, underscored its competitiveness, culminating in the 1896 realignment that transitioned to the through William McKinley's victory and the decline of agrarian radicalism.

Origins and Realignment

Collapse of the Second Party System

The Second Party System, characterized by competition between the Democratic and Whig parties, began to erode in the early 1850s amid intensifying sectional conflicts over slavery's expansion into western territories. The , which included the controversial Fugitive Slave Act requiring Northern cooperation in returning escaped slaves, fractured the Whig Party along regional lines: Northern Whigs, including figures like William Seward, opposed the measure as a moral betrayal, while Southern Whigs defended it to preserve party unity and Southern interests. This internal discord was exacerbated by the party's failure to coalesce around a unified stance on westward expansion following the Mexican-American War, with many Northern Whigs having opposed the conflict itself. The 1852 presidential election marked a decisive blow, as the Whigs nominated the Northern war hero Winfield Scott, alienating Southern supporters and resulting in a landslide defeat to Democrat Franklin Pierce, who secured 254 electoral votes to Scott's 42. Pierce's administration further accelerated the collapse through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, signed into law on May 30, 1854, which organized the territories of Kansas and Nebraska under the principle of popular sovereignty—allowing settlers to vote on slavery—effectively repealing the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that had prohibited slavery north of the 36°30' parallel. This legislation, championed by Senator Stephen Douglas to facilitate a transcontinental railroad, ignited Northern outrage, as it opened vast areas previously free of slavery to potential expansion, prompting anti-slavery activists to decry it as a "Slave Power" conspiracy. The Act's passage triggered immediate , dissolving Whig organizations in most Northern states by late , with former Whigs splintering into anti-slavery coalitions. In the 1854 midterm elections, anti-Nebraska candidates—drawing from Whigs, Democrats, and Free Soilers—gained over 100 seats in the , signaling the old system's demise. Concurrently, nativist sentiments fueled by a surge in Irish and German immigration (over 4 million arrivals between 1840 and 1860) bolstered the short-lived Know-Nothing Party, which briefly absorbed some Whig remnants but ultimately fractured over slavery. By 1856, the Whig Party had vanished as a national entity, unable to nominate a presidential , paving the way for the Republican Party's emergence as the primary Northern opposition force.
The ensuing violence in Kansas, dubbed "," exemplified the Act's destabilizing effects, with pro- and anti- settlers clashing in armed conflicts that killed over 200 people between 1854 and 1859, further eroding faith in bipartisan compromises. Democrats retained Southern dominance but hemorrhaged Northern support, as the realignment crystallized around as the defining issue, rendering the Second Party System's national coalitions untenable.

Formation of the Republican Party

The Republican Party emerged in 1854 amid widespread opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which organized the territories of and and introduced on the issue of , effectively repealing the of 1820 that had restricted 's expansion northward. Signed into law by President on May 30, 1854, the act intensified sectional divisions by permitting potential extension into areas previously designated free, galvanizing anti-slavery activists who viewed it as a betrayal of prior compromises. This legislation fractured existing parties, particularly the Whigs, whose northern and southern wings diverged irreconcilably on , paving the way for a new coalition. Initial organizational efforts began in the North, with a pivotal meeting on March 20, 1854, in , where local anti-slavery proponents, including former Whigs and Democrats, gathered in a schoolhouse to oppose the Kansas-Nebraska bill and proposed the name "Republican" to evoke Thomas Jefferson's earlier . This gathering marked an early coalescence of disparate groups, including Free Soilers who prioritized free labor and homestead opportunities, abolitionists seeking slavery's moral condemnation, and northern Whigs disillusioned by their party's collapse. By July 6, 1854, the first statewide Republican convention convened in , drawing about 10,000 attendees and formalizing opposition to slavery's territorial spread under the slogan "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Speech, Free Men." These meetings reflected a pragmatic rather than ideological uniformity, uniting economic nationalists favoring protective tariffs and with moral reformers, though tensions persisted over the pace of abolition. The party's national structure solidified with its first convention from June 17 to 19, 1856, in , , where delegates nominated for president on a platform explicitly rejecting slavery's expansion into federal territories. This event, attended by roughly 600 delegates from 15 northern and border states, excluded southern participation and emphasized containment of slavery as a core tenet, while advocating federal support for railroads, rivers, and harbors to foster northern industrial growth. Frémont's campaign garnered 114 electoral votes, nearly winning despite Democratic unity, demonstrating the Republicans' rapid viability as a sectional force capable of challenging the Democratic hold on national power. The formation thus represented not a radical break but a realignment driven by slavery's irrepressible conflict, consolidating northern interests against southern influence in territorial policy.

Sectional Tensions and Slavery as Catalysts

The deepening sectional divide between the industrializing North, which increasingly viewed as incompatible with free labor and republican ideals, and the agrarian South, where underpinned the economy and social order, eroded the national consensus of the Second Party System by the early 1850s. The Whig Party, already weakened by internal divisions over tariffs and , fractured irreparably along regional lines, as Northern Whigs opposed 's expansion while Southern Whigs defended it to preserve sectional balance in . Democrats, though more unified initially, faced mounting pressure as Northern members resisted Southern demands for 's protection in new territories. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of May 30, 1854, introduced by Senator Stephen Douglas to organize territories for a transcontinental railroad, served as the immediate catalyst by repealing the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had prohibited slavery north of the 36°30′ parallel. The act's provision for "popular sovereignty"—allowing territorial settlers to vote on slavery—ignited violence in "Bleeding Kansas," where pro- and anti-slavery factions clashed, resulting in over 200 deaths between 1854 and 1859, including the Sack of Lawrence on May 21, 1856, and John Brown's Pottawatomie Massacre on May 24, 1856. This turmoil exposed the inability of existing parties to contain the slavery issue, destroying the Whig Party's remnants and splintering Democrats, with Northern defections weakening their national hold. Opposition to the act coalesced into the Republican Party, formally organized at conventions in , on July 6, 1854, and , earlier that year, uniting former Whigs, Free Soilers, and anti-Nebraska Democrats committed to halting slavery's territorial expansion without initially challenging its existence in the South. By 1856, Republicans nominated John C. Frémont for president on a platform explicitly rejecting slavery's spread, capturing 33% of the popular vote and all Northern states except , , and , signaling the Third Party System's emergence as a sectional Republican-Democratic alignment. Subsequent events amplified these tensions: the Supreme Court's decision on March 6, 1857, ruled that Congress could not bar slavery from territories and denied citizenship to , alienating Northern moderates and bolstering Republican claims of a "Slave Power" conspiracy dominating federal institutions. The Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 further nationalized the issue, with arguing slavery's moral wrongness and inevitable extinction, eroding Douglas's popularity among and paving the way for the party's fracture. These developments, rooted in slavery's economic stakes—Southern cotton production reached 4 million bales annually by , comprising 57% of U.S. exports—rendered national parties untenable, catalyzing a realignment where sectional loyalty supplanted older ideological coalitions.

Voter Behavior and Coalitions

High Electoral Turnout and Participation

The Third Party System era, from the mid-1850s to the 1890s, featured some of the highest rates in U.S. history, with presidential elections averaging over 75% of the voting-age population (VAP) participating. This contrasted sharply with modern turnout levels, often below 60%, and reflected a where voting was a central civic and social obligation for eligible white male citizens. Turnout peaked in closely contested races, such as the 1876 election between and Samuel Tilden, which saw 81.8% VAP participation amid disputes over southern electoral processes. Similarly, the 1880 election recorded 79.4% turnout, driven by Republican mobilization against Democratic resurgence. Key data from presidential elections illustrate this pattern:
YearTurnout (% VAP)Notes
185678.9Republican debut against Democrats.
186081.2Sectional crisis elevated stakes.
186473.8Civil War suppressed some participation.
186878.3Reconstruction-era mobilization.
187271.3Lower due to economic issues and Liberal Republican split.
187681.8Highest recorded, fueled by fraud allegations.
188079.4Intense party competition.
188477.5Scandal-plagued campaign.
188879.3 debates energized voters.
189277.5Third-party Populist challenge.
These figures, calculated as votes cast divided by estimated VAP (adult white males until post-15th Amendment expansions, with varying black enfranchisement in the ), underscore systemic high engagement before turnout declined post-1896 amid registration laws and secret ballots. Several causal factors drove this elevated participation. Robust party machines, particularly Republican and Democratic organizations, invested heavily in mobilization, including parades, stump speeches, and social clubs that embedded in everyday community life, treating elections as festive communal events. Competitive two-party dynamics, with narrow margins on issues like tariffs, Reconstruction, and currency policy, created high perceived stakes, incentivizing turnout without the voter apathy seen in less polarized eras. Procedural openness further contributed: prior to widespread adoption of the secret "Australian ballot" in the 1890s, voting often involved public declaration or party-supplied tickets, exerting social pressure for conformity and participation among eligible men. Absent modern barriers like mandatory registration or tests (beyond southern post-Reconstruction impositions), eligible voters faced minimal logistical hurdles, amplifying raw turnout. However, this system excluded women, most in practice after , and immigrants without , limiting the electorate's representativeness despite numerical highs.

Religious and Cultural Divides

The religious landscape of the Third Party System (roughly 1854–1896) featured a pronounced divide between evangelical Protestants, who formed the core of Republican support in the North, and Catholic immigrants, who increasingly bolstered Democratic ranks in urban areas and the . This alignment reflected deeper cultural clashes over , , and institutional influence, with Protestants viewing Catholic influxes as threats to republican values and Protestant . Northern Republicans drew heavily from pietistic denominations like Methodists and Presbyterians, who emphasized personal morality and social reform, while Democrats appealed to Irish and German Catholics wary of Protestant-imposed cultural norms. Nativism intensified these tensions, particularly amid the post-1845 Irish potato famine migration, which swelled Catholic populations and sparked fears of papal conspiracies undermining American liberties. The Know-Nothing Party, formally the American Party, capitalized on this by advocating longer periods and restrictions on Catholic officeholders; it secured governorships in states like and in the 1854 elections and garnered 21.5% of the presidential vote in 1856 under . Anti-slavery elements among Northern Know-Nothings fused with nascent Republicans by 1856, providing crucial votes for Abraham Lincoln's 1860 victory, though the GOP downplayed overt nativism to broaden its coalition. , conversely, absorbed some nativist rhetoric but prioritized over anti-Catholic agitation. Cultural flashpoints, including the temperance crusade, further delineated party lines, as Protestant-led organizations like the pushed for alcohol restrictions from the 1830s onward, aligning with Republican moralism during Reconstruction and campaigns. By the 1870s, Republicans in dry states like enacted prohibition laws, reflecting evangelical priorities, while wet urban Democrats opposed them as assaults on immigrant . Disputes over state funding for Catholic parochial schools—opposed by Protestants as violating nonsectarian principles—and enforcement of closing laws similarly pitted Republican reformers against Democratic defenders of ethnic pluralism, sustaining cultural polarization through the era's end.

Regional and Demographic Bases

The Republican Party established its strongest regional base in the , encompassing , the Midwest, and industrial areas of the Northeast, where it consistently captured majorities in presidential elections from 1860 onward. In the 1860 election, won every free state except , which split its electoral votes, reflecting the party's dominance in non-slaveholding regions opposed to territorial expansion of . This Northern stronghold persisted through the , as evidenced by James A. Garfield's 1880 victory, where Republicans secured all Northern states except parts of New York and , bolstered by wartime loyalty and economic policies favoring and tariffs. Conversely, the Democratic Party maintained a solid base in the South, known as the "," particularly after the end of Reconstruction in 1877, when white Southerners regained control and suppressed Black Republican voting through measures like poll taxes and literacy tests. , drawing support from agrarian interests and former Confederates, opposed federal intervention in state affairs, securing victories in states like Georgia, , and across multiple elections, including Grover Cleveland's 1884 and 1892 wins confined largely to Southern and border states. Border states such as and provided mixed support, often leaning Democratic due to ties to Southern culture and economy. Demographically, Republicans appealed primarily to Northern Protestants, including Methodists, Presbyterians, and Congregationalists, who aligned with the party's moral opposition to and advocacy for temperance and reforms. This base included prosperous farmers, factory workers, professionals, and businessmen in urbanizing areas, as well as some German and Scandinavian immigrants who favored free labor ideals over . Post-Civil War, freed Black voters in the briefly bolstered Republican ranks under Reconstruction, though this eroded with Democratic resurgence. Democrats, in contrast, garnered support from Catholic immigrants, particularly Irish laborers in Northern cities, who resented Republican nativism and economic policies, as well as Southern white farmers and emphasizing and low tariffs. In the North, urban working-class ethnics formed Democratic machines in cities like New York and , while in the South, the party unified white voters across classes against perceived Republican overreach during Reconstruction. Religious divides were stark, with Episcopalians and some Lutherans in the South leaning Democratic, reinforcing cultural and sectional cleavages that defined voter coalitions throughout the era.

Ideological Frameworks

Republican Economic Nationalism and Moral Stance

The Republican Party's economic nationalism emphasized federal intervention to promote industrial growth, infrastructure, and opportunities for free labor, distinguishing it from Democratic laissez-faire approaches. Protective tariffs formed a cornerstone, with the Morrill Tariff Act, passed on March 2, 1861, raising average import duties from 20% to approximately 47% to safeguard Northern manufacturers from European competition and generate revenue for national projects. Republicans contended that such barriers preserved high wages for American workers by countering low-cost foreign goods, aligning with their vision of a diversified economy less reliant on Southern cotton exports. This policy persisted through subsequent acts, like the 1862 and 1864 tariff revisions, which funded the Civil War while entrenching industrial protectionism until the 1890s. Internal improvements and land policies further embodied this . The Homestead Act of May 20, 1862, offered 160 acres of federal land to any citizen or immigrant who improved it for five years, distributing over 270 million acres by and accelerating westward settlement to create a farmer base supportive of Republican ideals. Complementing this, the Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 and 1864 subsidized the , completed in 1869, integrating markets and symbolizing national unity through federally backed enterprise. The National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 centralized currency issuance under federal oversight, curbing state bank instability and financing wartime debt via bonds, thus laying groundwork for a modern . These measures, rooted in Whig precedents but radicalized by Republican majorities post-1860, prioritized national economic cohesion over . Morally, Republicans framed their platform around opposition to 's expansion, portraying it as an on human and the free labor system that enabled personal advancement. The 1860 platform affirmed territories as free soil, rejecting 's spread to uphold of Independence's equality principles, while leaders like Lincoln deemed a "monstrous injustice" incompatible with republican virtue. This free labor ideology idealized wage work and self-improvement, viewing as degrading both enslaved and free workers by suppressing competition and innovation. Wartime policies, including the of January 1, 1863, and the Thirteenth Amendment ratified on December 6, 1865, translated moral rhetoric into abolition, with Republicans controlling to enforce these changes. , the advanced Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments in 1868 and 1870, granting and voting rights to freedmen, though commitment eroded amid Southern resistance and Northern fatigue by the 1876 compromise.

Democratic Agrarianism and States' Rights

The Democratic Party during the Third Party System positioned itself as the defender of agrarian interests, rooted in Jeffersonian ideals that prioritized independent small farmers and rural economies as the moral and economic core of the republic. This stance contrasted sharply with Republican advocacy for industrial development and federal subsidies, as Democrats argued that policies like protective tariffs and disproportionately benefited Northern manufacturers at the expense of Southern planters and Western grain producers. Agrarian Democrats favored low revenue tariffs to minimize costs on imported goods essential for farming, such as machinery and consumer items, while opposing any measures that could inflate prices or favor urban financial elites. Central to this ideology was opposition to centralized banking and fiscal policies perceived as tools of federal overreach. Democrats inherited Jacksonian suspicion of national banks, viewing institutions like the post-Civil War National Banking System—established by Republican legislation in —as mechanisms that concentrated credit in Eastern cities, disadvantaging rural borrowers and promoting speculative finance over sound agricultural lending. Instead, they advocated for state-chartered banks and standards to ensure monetary stability aligned with commodity-based economies, a position that resonated with debt-burdened farmers facing volatile crop prices. This agrarian focus solidified Democratic coalitions in the , where plantation agriculture dominated, and among Midwestern smallholders wary of industrial monopolies. The principle of formed the ideological backbone of Democratic resistance to federal intervention, emphasizing limited national authority and local self-determination, particularly on issues like and territorial organization. In the 1860 platform adopted by the Northern (Douglas) faction, the party endorsed , affirming that territorial legislatures held the power to regulate domestic institutions such as , with final adjudication by the , while pledging enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law against obstructive state actions. This doctrine justified ' defense of as a state-protected right and fueled opposition to Republican proposals for federal coercion, including the and homestead laws that bypassed local consent. Postwar, rhetoric intensified against Reconstruction, portraying federal military governance and civil rights amendments as violations of constitutional , thereby sustaining Southern Democratic loyalty amid electoral efforts. Economic manifestations of these principles included vehement Democratic critiques of Republican tariff policies, exemplified by the of 1861, which raised average duties to approximately 47% primarily to fund war efforts but also to shield domestic industry. Democrats, controlling Congress before Southern secession, had blocked earlier versions, decrying them as sectional plunder that raised import costs for agrarian consumers without reciprocal benefits for exporters reliant on global markets. By the 1880s, this opposition culminated in Grover Cleveland's 1887 annual message, where the president—representing reform-minded agrarians and fiscal conservatives—demanded tariff reductions to eliminate surplus , lower living costs for farmers, and adhere to revenue-only principles, though congressional compromises like the 1894 Wilson-Gorman Act yielded modest cuts offset by an . These positions underscored a causal commitment to decentralism and producerist economics, prioritizing rural autonomy over national consolidation, even as internal tensions with emerging Populist demands for silver coinage tested party unity.

Critiques of Party Ideologies from Contemporary Perspectives

Contemporary free-market economists contend that the Republican Party's , exemplified by high protective tariffs averaging 40-50% on imports from the 1860s to 1890s, imposed undue costs on consumers and fostered inefficiency rather than genuine industrial superiority. Analysis of tariff policy during this era indicates that while revenue generation supported federal infrastructure, the protective effects often benefited entrenched producers at the expense of broader economic welfare, with duties on manufactured goods like and inflating domestic prices without commensurate gains. The Act of October 1, 1890, which elevated average rates to 49.5%—the highest in U.S. peacetime history up to that point—exemplifies this approach, correlating with subsequent voter backlash and Republican losses in the 1890 congressional elections, where Democrats gained over 70 seats. Libertarian-leaning scholars further critique Republican ideology for embedding cronyist elements, where subsidies for railroads and under acts like the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 prioritized politically connected enterprises over market-driven allocation, sowing seeds of later . This perspective attributes much of the Gilded Age's industrial expansion to and immigration-fueled labor supply rather than tariff-induced protection, dismissing claims of tariff causality as post hoc amid confounding factors like resource abundance. Such views contrast with defenses from economic historians who note tariffs' role in funding Union war debts and early industrialization, though even proponents acknowledge retaliatory barriers and incentives as unintended distortions. From progressive historiographical angles, Republican moralism against is acknowledged as a pivotal anti-authoritarian force, yet critiqued for evolving into post-Civil War policies that privileged Northern capital over , as evidenced by the party's resistance to union organizing and tolerance of strikes like the 1877 railroad upheaval suppressed by federal troops. This ideological pivot toward business interests, per analyses of party platforms from 1868-1892, subordinated egalitarian reforms to Hamiltonian developmentalism, exacerbating income disparities where by 1890 the top 1% held 51% of wealth. Academic sources advancing this view, often from institutions with documented ideological tilts, emphasize how Republican dominance perpetuated machine politics and graft, as in the of 1872 involving Union Pacific kickbacks to congressmen. Turning to Democratic ideology, contemporary historians across ideological spectra highlight doctrine as a rhetorical shield for sectional interests, enabling 's entrenchment via doctrines like those in the decision of 1857 and obstructing national enforcement of emancipation post-1865. This decentralization, rooted in Jeffersonian , is faulted for prioritizing local majorities over uniform civil protections, with Southern Democratic platforms from 1856-1860 explicitly defending as a against federal overreach. Modern critiques, including from conservative institutions, argue this framework delayed , as Democratic resistance to national banking and tariffs left the South agrarian and capital-poor, with lagging Northern states by 50% or more by 1890. Libertarians extend criticism to Democratic agrarianism for romanticizing smallholder while ignoring how empowered monopolistic local elites, such as planter oligarchies enforcing peonage systems that bound freedmen in post-1865, contravening free principles. Empirical reconstructions of voting patterns show Democratic coalitions in the sustained by cultural homogeneity over policy , contributing to technological stagnation where cotton production methods changed little from 1860 to 1900 despite Northern . Conservative analysts, conversely, sometimes defend Democratic fiscal restraint—opposing greenbacks and favoring hard money—as prescient against inflationary risks, though this is tempered by acknowledgment of the party's complicity in nullification crises like South Carolina's 1832 standoff. Overall, both parties' ideologies are seen today as adaptive to 19th-century exigencies but flawed in perpetuating factionalism over principled , with empirical underscoring how partisan on prolonged deflationary panics like 1873-1879.

Civil War Era Dynamics

Election of 1860 and Southern

The 1860 occurred amid deepening sectional divisions over 's expansion into western territories, with the Democratic Party fracturing at its convention in Charleston earlier that year, unable to agree on a platform or nominee. Northern Democrats nominated of , advocating popular sovereignty on in territories, while Southern Democrats selected of , supporting a federal slave code in territories. The Constitutional Union Party, formed by former Whigs, nominated John Bell of to preserve the Union and enforce existing laws without addressing directly. Republicans, opposing 's territorial extension but not its abolition in existing states, nominated of on a platform pledging free soil, homesteads, and a Pacific railroad. Lincoln received no votes in ten Southern states, reflecting the party's regional weakness there. Lincoln secured victory with 39.8% of the popular vote (1,855,993 votes) and 180 electoral votes, carrying all free states except , where he split electors with Douglas. Douglas garnered 29.5% (1,380,202 votes) and 12 electoral votes from and ; Breckinridge took 18.1% (848,019 votes) and 72 electoral votes, mainly from states; Bell obtained 12.6% (590,901 votes) and 39 electoral votes in border and upper South areas like and . reached approximately 81.2% of eligible males, the second-highest in U.S. history, driven by the crisis's intensity. The results underscored slavery's role as the paramount issue, with Lincoln's triumph—despite a popular vote plurality—signaling Republican control of the federal government without Southern electoral support. Southern leaders had warned that a Republican victory would prompt secession to safeguard slavery, viewing Lincoln's platform as an existential threat despite its pledge not to interfere with slavery in states where it existed. Declarations of secession explicitly cited the protection of slavery as the core motivation, rejecting Northern non-compliance with the Fugitive Slave Act and the election of a party hostile to the institution's expansion and security. South Carolina led by convening a secession convention on December 17, 1860, and adopting an ordinance of secession on December 20, asserting that the non-slaveholding states had "denounced as sinful the institution of slavery" and formed a sectional party to destroy it. Subsequent secessions accelerated: on January 9, 1861, declaring its position "thoroughly identified with the institution of —the greatest material interest of the world"; on January 10; on January 11; Georgia on January 19, decrying non-slaveholding states' hostility to African ; on January 26; and on February 1, emphasizing 's benefits to both races and the North's aggression against it. These seven states formed the on February 8, 1861, in , adopting a that explicitly protected and prohibited its abolition. Upper South states initially resisted but seceded after : on April 17, on May 6, and on May 20, bringing the total to eleven. This cascade dissolved the Union as understood before 1860, precipitating the Civil War.

Northern Union Policies and Republican Dominance

The Republican Party, the primary political force in the North, advocated for preserving the Union, opposing the expansion of slavery into new territories, and, under President Lincoln's leadership, advancing emancipation as a wartime measure. The secession of Southern states following Abraham Lincoln's election in 1860 provided Republicans with unchallenged majorities in , allowing them to enact policies previously blocked by . This dominance facilitated the passage of the Act of 1861, which raised import duties to an average of 47% to protect Northern industries and generate revenue for the war effort. Similarly, the introduced the first federal , imposing a 3% levy on incomes over $800 to finance Union military operations. Economic mobilization under Republican leadership included the Legal Tender Act of 1862, which authorized the issuance of paper currency known as greenbacks to circumvent specie shortages, and the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864, which established a national banking system to standardize currency and fund the war through bond sales. Infrastructure and development policies advanced with the Pacific Railway Act of 1862, granting land and loans for a , and the Homestead Act of 1862, which offered 160 acres of public land to settlers completing five years of residency, promoting Western expansion and agricultural growth in Northern-aligned territories. The Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 further supported Republican priorities by donating federal lands to states for establishing agricultural and mechanical colleges, fostering technical education to bolster industrial capacity. On emancipation, Lincoln's of January 1, 1863, declared slaves in Confederate-held areas free, a policy aligned with Republican anti-slavery platforms, though initially limited to wartime measures; reinforced this with the Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in December 1865, abolishing slavery nationwide. Military and naval strategies, such as the Anaconda Plan's of Southern ports initiated in April 1861, aimed to strangle Confederate trade, with Union forces capturing key ports like New Orleans in 1862, contributing to economic pressure on the . Northern Democrats were divided between War Democrats who supported the Union war effort and Copperhead Democrats who opposed continued fighting and favored peace negotiations with the Confederacy; Republican dominance extended to suppressing this internal dissent, particularly against Copperheads, with Lincoln suspending habeas corpus in 1861, leading to thousands of arrests, including journalist Clement Vallandigham in 1863, to maintain war support in the North. Electorally, Republicans secured Lincoln's re-election in 1864 under the National Union Party banner, capturing 55% of the popular vote and all but three states, reflecting sustained Northern backing amid battlefield successes like Atlanta's fall. This control persisted post-war, with Republicans holding the presidency and congressional majorities until 1875, solidifying their ideological framework of nationalism, industrial protectionism, and federal authority.

Southern Confederate Politics and Democratic Divisions

Southern Democrats, who had predominantly supported secession, formed the backbone of Confederate leadership, with the Confederate States of America operating as a de facto one-party polity, lacking formal opposition parties due to the unifying imperative of secession and war, and drawing its leadership from pre-war Southern Democrats and former Whigs who coalesced around pro-slavery and states' rights principles. The provisional Congress, convened on February 8, 1861, in Montgomery, Alabama, elected Jefferson Davis—a former Democratic U.S. senator and secretary of war—as president, reflecting the dominance of Democratic-aligned fire-eaters and cooperationists who had driven the secession conventions in states like South Carolina (December 20, 1860) and Mississippi (January 9, 1861). This structure emphasized a constitution that prohibited protective tariffs, restricted internal improvements, and explicitly protected slavery, yet it granted the central government broader wartime powers than the U.S. Constitution, setting the stage for internal tensions. Divisions within this ostensibly unified framework emerged primarily over the tension between ideological commitment to states' rights and the practical demands of centralized wartime governance, fracturing the former Democratic coalition. Davis's administration, facing resource shortages and military reversals, enacted measures like the Conscription Act of April 16, 1862—the first draft in American history—which exempted large slaveholders (owning 20 or more slaves) and triggered backlash from small farmers and states' rights advocates who viewed it as tyrannical overreach. Governors exemplified these rifts: Georgia's Joseph E. Brown withheld state militia from Confederate service, challenged conscription in court, and resisted impressment of goods, arguing it violated state sovereignty; North Carolina's Zebulon Vance similarly delayed troop deployments and negotiated separate peace feelers in 1864, prioritizing local interests amid bread riots in cities like Richmond (April 2, 1863). Florida's John Milton and Texas's Pendleton Murrah echoed these obstructions, with Murrah refusing to furnish quota troops after 1863, exacerbating supply failures that contributed to defeats at Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863) and Vicksburg (July 4, 1863). Congressional factionalism further highlighted Democratic divisions, as purists clashed with nationalists favoring Davis's executive expansions, such as the suspension of (authorized March 1862) and tax-in-kind levies (1863), which critics decried as consolidating power akin to Lincoln's policies they had condemned. Figures like Tennessee's , a former Unionist turned Confederate senator, openly attacked Davis for favoritism in military appointments and fiscal mismanagement, attempting to impeach him in 1864 amid debates over armistice proposals. These intra-Southern conflicts, rooted in class disparities—where farmers bore disproportionate burdens while gained exemptions—fueled desertions (over 100,000 by 1864) and Unionist insurgencies in , undermining morale and logistics in a ill-equipped for . By late 1864, as evidenced by the (February 3, 1865), these divisions precluded unified negotiation strategies, hastening the Confederacy's collapse on April 9, 1865.

Postwar Reconstruction and Consolidation

Radical Reconstruction Measures

The Radical Republicans in Congress, seeking to ensure Republican dominance and protect freedmen's rights, enacted the First Reconstruction Act on March 2, 1867, over President Andrew Johnson's veto. This legislation divided the former Confederate states (excluding ) into five military districts, each under a Union general's command, and mandated that Southern states draft new constitutions guaranteeing suffrage for black males and ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment as conditions for readmission to the Union. Subsequent acts refined these measures: the Second Reconstruction Act of March 23, 1867, empowered military commanders to oversee and suppress opposition; the Third Act of July 19, 1867, facilitated provisional governments; and the Fourth Act of March 11, 1868, eased some barriers to state compliance while maintaining federal oversight. These acts effectively nullified Johnson's lenient policy of rapid Southern reintegration under presidential pardons, imposing instead a framework of federal military governance to dismantle antebellum power structures. Central to these measures were the . The Fourteenth Amendment, proposed in 1866 and ratified on , 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, prohibited states from abridging privileges or immunities of citizens, , or equal protection, and penalized states for denying voting rights by reducing congressional representation. Southern states' ratification was coerced as a prerequisite for ending military rule, with 28 states approving by mid-1868 despite rejections from holdouts like and . The Fifteenth Amendment, proposed on February 26, 1869, and ratified on February 3, 1870, barred federal and state denial of voting rights based on race, color, or previous servitude, extending protections amid ongoing Southern resistance. These amendments aimed to constitutionalize black civil and political equality, but their enforcement relied on congressional legislation like the of 1870-1871, which authorized federal intervention against voter intimidation. Enforcement mechanisms included expansion of the , originally established March 3, 1865, and extended over Johnson's veto on July 16, 1866, to distribute aid, oversee labor contracts, and establish schools for over 250,000 freedmen by 1870. Military districts oversaw elections where voter registration surged—reaching 90% in some areas by 1868—leading to the of over 1,000 officials, including two U.S. senators and 20 congressmen, though often in coalition with "scalawag" whites and "carpetbaggers." Conflicts with Johnson escalated, culminating in his February 21, 1868, suspension and dismissal of Secretary of War , violating the Tenure of Office Act; the House impeached him on February 24, 1868, by a 126-47 vote, but the Senate acquitted him on May 26, 1868, by a single vote margin. These measures temporarily empowered black political participation and Republican governments in the South, registering over 700,000 black voters by 1867 and enabling constitutional conventions that abolished property requirements and Confederate debts. However, implementation faced violent opposition from groups like the , prompting the Army's deployment under the 1871 , which suspended in nine counties. Empirical outcomes revealed limits: while literacy rates among freedmen rose modestly through Bureau schools, economic dependency persisted without widespread land redistribution, fostering resentment that undermined long-term stability and contributed to federal withdrawal by 1877. Radical measures prioritized punitive restructuring over reconciliation, yielding short-term gains in enfranchisement but provoking a causal backlash of white solidarity and Democratic resurgence, as evidenced by declining black turnout from 1868 peaks to under 50% by 1876 in key states.

Economic Policies and Industrial Growth

Republican economic policies in the postwar period prioritized , financial stabilization, and development to accelerate Northern industrialization and national . High protective tariffs, initiated with the of 1861 and sustained through measures like the Tariff of 1864, shielded emerging U.S. manufacturers from foreign competition while generating federal revenue that funded reconstruction efforts and . These tariffs averaged around 45-50% on dutiable imports by the late , favoring heavy industries such as iron, textiles, and machinery in states like and . The National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 established a uniform national currency and a network of federally chartered banks, replacing the patchwork of state banks and wildcat currency that had prevailed before the war. This system, enforced through a 10% tax on state bank notes, centralized monetary policy under the Treasury and facilitated credit expansion for industrial investment, with national bank notes in circulation rising from $0 in 1863 to over $300 million by 1866. By promoting fiscal reliability, these reforms reduced speculation risks and supported capital flows to factories and railroads, contributing to an average annual industrial production growth of 5.16% during Reconstruction (1865-1877). Infrastructure investments, particularly in railroads, drove transformative industrial expansion through federal land grants and subsidies under the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 and subsequent legislation. Railroad mileage surged from approximately 35,000 miles in 1865 to over 70,000 miles by 1880, enabling efficient resource transport and market access that lowered costs for , , and agricultural goods feeding urban factories. The completion of the in 1869 exemplified this policy's scale, integrating Western raw materials into Eastern manufacturing hubs and spurring ancillary industries like production, which benefited from adoption and rose from negligible levels pre-war to 1.25 million tons annually by 1880. These policies, while concentrating growth in the North and Midwest, laid the foundation for the U.S. to emerge as a leading industrial power, with manufacturing output doubling between 1865 and 1880 amid abundant immigrant labor and natural resources.

Corruption and Machine Politics

The dominated postwar American politics, awarding federal, state, and local positions to party loyalists irrespective of qualifications, which incentivized graft, patronage, and inefficiency as officeholders prioritized rewarding supporters over public service. This practice, entrenched since Andrew Jackson's era, intensified amid Reconstruction's fiscal expansions and urban growth, enabling bosses to amass power through vote-buying and contract rigging. Under Republican President (1869–1877), scandals proliferated due to appointments of unqualified cronies, undermining administrative integrity despite Grant's personal probity. The , revealed in September 1872, involved officials distributing discounted stock worth up to $331,000 to congressmen, including future and Senator James Harlan, to secure favorable railroad legislation. The of 1875 defrauded the of approximately $3.5 million in evaded liquor taxes through collusion between distillers, revenue agents, and St. Louis collectors, implicating Grant's private secretary Orville Babcock, though Grant controversially testified on his behalf. Democratic machines mirrored this corruption at the municipal level, notably in , where William M. "Boss" Tweed led the Tweed Ring from 1865 to 1871, embezzling $65–200 million via padded bills for projects like the county courthouse, which cost $12 million against an original $250,000 estimate. Tweed's arrest in 1872 and conviction in November 1873 for forgery and larceny exposed how machines traded essential services—food, jobs, and naturalization aid—to immigrant voters for bloc loyalty, often enforced by ward heelers through ballot stuffing and intimidation. In Southern Reconstruction governments (1865–1877), Republican regimes faced bipartisan charges of extravagance and theft, with state debts ballooning—Louisiana's from $1 million prewar to $28 million by 1876—attributed to inexperience, wartime devastation, and opportunistic scalawags, though Democratic critiques sometimes inflated claims to justify Redeemer coups. Real instances included South Carolina's 1872 ring defrauding $425,000 in legislative salaries, fueling national disillusionment with Radical policies. Such abuses spurred incremental reforms, including the of January 16, 1883, which mandated merit exams for 10–15% of federal jobs initially, enacted after Charles Guiteau assassinated President on July 2, 1881, over a denied consular post. Yet machines persisted into the 1890s, adapting to industrial booms by allying with business interests for kickbacks on franchises and contracts.

Gilded Age Challenges

Monetary Debates and Tariff Policies

During the , monetary policy debates centered on the shift to a following the , which demonetized silver and prompted accusations of a covert abandonment of , dubbed the "Crime of 1873" by silver proponents. Agrarian interests, debtors, and Western miners argued that unlimited silver coinage would expand the money supply, ease farm debt burdens amid falling commodity prices, and promote inflation to counteract deflationary pressures from post-Civil War economic contraction. Republicans, aligned with Eastern bankers and industrialists, defended the for its stability and predictability, viewing silver inflation as a threat to creditor interests and long-term economic confidence. The Bland-Allison Act of February 28, 1878, represented a compromise, overriding President Rutherford B. Hayes's veto to mandate U.S. Treasury purchases of $2 to $4 million in silver bullion monthly for coining into dollars, aiming to partially restore without full free coinage. Silver advocates, including farmers and miners, deemed it inadequate, as President Hayes minimized purchases at the lower end, minting only about 12 million dollars by 1890 while silver prices continued declining. This tension escalated with the of July 14, 1890, which required buying 4.5 million ounces of silver monthly—nearly double prior levels—funded by Treasury notes redeemable in gold or silver, exacerbating gold reserve drains and contributing to the by eroding investor confidence in redeemability. President , a Democrat favoring gold, secured its repeal in 1893 amid the crisis, solidifying partisan lines with Republicans often accommodating silver to court Western votes despite core gold preferences. Tariff policies similarly divided parties along sectional and economic lines, with Republicans championing high protective duties to shield nascent industries from foreign competition, arguing they fostered domestic growth and generated revenue for infrastructure like Civil War debt repayment. The of October 1, 1890, enacted under Republican control, elevated average rates to nearly 50%—the highest in U.S. history at the time—covering dutiable imports and prompting consumer price hikes, particularly on woolens and , while benefiting and sectors. Democrats, representing Southern agricultural exporters and urban consumers, advocated tariff-for-revenue-only approaches to lower living costs and promote reciprocity, criticizing as a for monopolistic trusts that burdened farmers with higher equipment prices. This clash fueled electoral volatility, as seen in the 1890 midterm losses for Republicans, underscoring tariffs' role in amplifying economic grievances without resolving underlying industrial-agricultural tensions.

Labor Unrest and Social Issues

The period of rapid industrialization during the exacerbated labor tensions, as workers confronted stagnant wages, extended workdays exceeding 12 hours, and hazardous factory conditions without legal protections. Strikes proliferated, rising from approximately 500 annually in the early —encompassing about 150,000 workers—to over 1,000 per year by the 1890s, involving millions and often met with violent suppression by private security, state militias, or federal troops. The epitomized early widespread unrest, igniting on July 16 in , after the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad imposed a 10% cut amid . It rapidly expanded to involve over 100,000 workers across 14 states, paralyzing half the nation's freight shipments and prompting riots in , , and , where strikers torched rail yards and faced gunfire from authorities. Federal intervention under President deployed troops, resulting in over 100 deaths, hundreds wounded, and exceeding $40 million before the strikes collapsed without concessions. Subsequent conflicts underscored deepening divides. The on May 4, 1886, in stemmed from a rally for the eight-hour workday amid a of 300,000 workers; an unknown bomber's killed seven police officers and four civilians, inciting a broader backlash that associated labor activism with and radicalism, particularly among immigrant communities. Eight anarchist leaders were convicted in trials criticized for lacking direct evidence, with four hanged and one dying by suicide in prison, accelerating the Knights of Labor's membership decline from 700,000 to under 100,000 by 1890. Violence peaked in the of July 1892 at Carnegie Steel's mill, where 3,800 unionized workers rejected wage reductions and blocked non-union hires. Company manager hired 300 Pinkerton agents, who clashed with strikers on July 6 in a gun battle killing at least 10 (including three Pinkertons, seven strikers/civilians) and wounding dozens; Governor Robert Pattison then mobilized 8,500 state militia to seize the plant, enabling strikebreakers to resume operations and ultimately dissolving the powerful Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. The of May 1894 further highlighted federal bias toward capital, as 4,000 workers at George Pullman's car works protested a 25-40% wage slash without rent reductions in company housing. ' expanded it into a nationwide of Pullman cars, idling 125,000 rail workers and disrupting mail service across 27 states. President issued an injunction under the —ironically applied against labor—and dispatched 12,000 U.S. troops and marshals, sparking riots that destroyed $80 million in rail property and killed 30; Debs received a six-month prison sentence for contempt, emerging radicalized toward . Parallel social strains arose from unchecked and , which supplied industrial labor but strained resources. The urban population doubled from 19.8% in 1860 to 39.7% by 1900, concentrating millions in squalid tenements plagued by failures, outbreaks, and child labor— with over 1.75 million children under 16 employed by 1900, often in mills for 10-12 hours daily. Immigration surged, with 12 million arrivals from 1870 to 1900, predominantly Southern and Eastern Europeans alongside Chinese laborers until the 1882 Exclusion Act barred further Chinese entry amid nativist fears of wage undercutting and cultural dilution. These inflows fueled but intensified inequality, as industrial titans amassed fortunes—John D. Rockefeller's wealth reaching $1 billion by 1913—while workers endured poverty wages averaging $400-500 annually, prompting sporadic socialist and anarchist agitation but limited political redress until third-party challenges.

Emergence of Third Parties

The stagnation of the major parties during the , characterized by patronage-driven politics and limited responsiveness to economic grievances, fostered the rise of third parties addressing overlooked issues such as and social reform. Following the , which triggered and widespread debtor distress among farmers and laborers, demands grew for inflationary measures to ease credit burdens, leading to the formation of parties outside the Republican-Democratic duopoly. These groups drew support from agrarian and working-class constituencies disillusioned with the gold standard's constraints and the major parties' focus on tariffs and reconstruction. One of the earliest enduring third parties was the , established on September 30, 1869, in by temperance advocates seeking to ban the production and sale of alcohol amid rising concerns over its social and economic costs. Rooted in evangelical Protestant movements, the party nominated its first presidential candidate, James Black, in 1872, garnering about 5,608 votes (0.04% of the total), signaling initial organizational efforts despite limited national impact. Its platform emphasized moral legislation, reflecting broader cultural anxieties about and immigration-fueled vice, and it persisted through state-level successes, such as electing local officials in dry communities. The emerged in 1874 as a direct response to the Specie Resumption Act of 1875, which mandated redeeming greenbacks (fiat currency issued during the Civil War) in gold, exacerbating that halved commodity prices between 1870 and 1879 and intensified rural hardships. Formed initially as the Independent National Party before adopting the Greenback-Labor label, it advocated unlimited issuance of paper money to inflate the currency, combat monopolies, and support , attracting alliances with trade unions and farmer groups in the Midwest and . In the midterm elections, Greenback candidates secured 14 seats in the , representing a peak of influence before presidential bids; received 81,737 votes (0.9%) in 1876, while polled 3.3% in 1880, demonstrating viability in states like and where economic discontent peaked. These parties highlighted fractures in the , pressuring Democrats and Republicans to incorporate elements like silver coinage debates, though their structural barriers—such as winner-take-all elections and lack of —limited longevity. The Greenback Party's decline by 1889, merging into broader labor efforts, underscored how third-party innovations often diffused into major platforms without sustaining independent power.

Decline and Transition

Populist Agitation and Farmer Revolt

In the late , American farmers, particularly in the and Midwest, faced severe economic pressures from deflationary policies under the gold standard, which increased the real burden of fixed debts amid falling prices due to and global competition. Wheat prices dropped from $1.19 per bushel in 1881 to $0.49 in 1894, while fell from 11.9 cents per pound in 1880 to 5.8 cents by 1893, exacerbating indebtedness through the crop-lien system where farmers borrowed against future harvests at high interest rates often exceeding 10 percent annually. Railroads, as monopolistic entities, imposed discriminatory freight rates, charging farmers up to three times more to ship goods from rural depots than from urban centers, further squeezing margins as machinery and fertilizer costs rose under trusts like those of and . These grievances spurred the growth of Farmers' Alliances, cooperative organizations that began in in 1875 and expanded rapidly; by 1890, the Southern Farmers' claimed over 1 million members, the around 100,000, and the Colored Farmers' National Alliance and Union about 250,000 Black farmers in the . Initial efforts focused on economic self-help through cooperatives for purchasing supplies and marketing crops, but repeated failures—such as the collapse of the Southern Alliance's bag factory in due to competition from established manufacturers—shifted emphasis to political agitation. Alliance lecturers toured rural areas, decrying "the money power" and corporate monopolies, fostering a sense of class conflict between producers and non-producers. The movement's political demands crystallized at the National Farmers' Alliance convention in , on December 17-19, 1890, where delegates adopted the Ocala Demands, calling for free and unlimited coinage of silver at 16:1 ratio to gold, a subtreasury system allowing farmers to store crops in government warehouses and borrow up to 80 percent of their value in greenbacks, abolition of national banks in favor of Treasury-issued money, a graduated , direct of senators, and government ownership of railroads and telegraphs to curb discriminatory practices. These reforms aimed to inflate the currency, easing debt burdens and countering , while targeting transportation monopolies that alliances claimed extracted $500 million annually in excess profits from farmers. Though initially fused with Democrats in Southern states, failures to enact these within major parties—such as the defeat of subtreasury bills in —prompted independent action. Populist agitation peaked with the formation of the People's Party, or Populist Party, at the Omaha Convention on July 2-5, 1892, where over 1,300 delegates from 35 states endorsed a platform echoing Ocala while adding demands for an eight-hour workday, postal savings banks, and prohibition of alien land ownership. Nominee garnered 1,041,028 votes (8.5 percent) and 22 electoral votes from Western states, signaling rural revolt against the two-party system's alignment with industrial interests. This farmer-led insurgency, blending monetary radicalism with anti-monopoly rhetoric, marked the Third Party System's late challenge to Republican-Democratic dominance, though internal divisions over race and fusion tactics limited longevity.

Climactic Election of 1896

The 1896 presidential election pitted Republican nominee William McKinley, an advocate of the gold standard and protective tariffs, against William Jennings Bryan, who received nominations from both the Democratic Party and the Populist Party (also known as the People's Party). The Populist Party, representing agrarian interests aggrieved by falling crop prices, railroad monopolies, and deflationary monetary policy, had endorsed Bryan after fusing with silverite Democrats at their national convention in St. Louis on July 25, 1896, viewing his candidacy as a vehicle for their demands including free coinage of silver at a 16-to-1 ratio against gold. This fusion marked the Populists' high-water mark, as they sacrificed an independent ticket to amplify their platform's influence within the major parties, but it also tied their fate to Bryan's outcome. Bryan's electrifying "Cross of Gold" speech, delivered on July 9, 1896, at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, galvanized silver advocates by decrying the gold standard as a tool of Eastern bankers crucifying humanity "upon a cross of gold" and demanding bimetallism to inflate the currency and relieve debtors. The address, which lasted over 20 minutes and concluded with Bryan spreading his arms in crucifixion pose, secured his Democratic nomination on the fifth ballot and prompted the Populists' subsequent endorsement, though some party members balked at supporting a non-Populist for president. McKinley's campaign, managed by industrialist Mark Hanna, raised unprecedented funds—over $3.5 million from business interests fearing silver inflation—and emphasized economic stability, wage protection for workers, and prosperity under gold, conducting a "front-porch" campaign from Canton, Ohio, that drew 750,000 visitors. Held on November 3, 1896, the election saw record turnout exceeding 79% of eligible voters, with McKinley securing 271 electoral votes to Bryan's 176 and 51.1% of the popular vote (7,104,779 votes against Bryan's 6,502,925). Bryan's strength lay in the agrarian South and West, where Populist fusion boosted Democratic margins in states like and , but he faltered in industrial Midwest swing states like and , where urban workers and immigrants prioritized gold-standard stability amid recovery from the Panic of 1893. The National (Gold) Democratic Party, a splinter group backing gold, nominated but garnered only 1% of the vote, underscoring the polarization. The election proved climactic for third parties by accelerating the Populist Party's demise; Bryan's defeat discredited as a national solution, leading to the party's rapid disintegration as members either realigned with Democrats or abandoned politics, with no significant independent Populist presidential candidacy after 1896. It entrenched a class-based partisan divide—Republicans dominating urban, industrial, and business voters committed to and tariffs, while Democrats absorbed Populist agrarian elements—heralding the Fourth Party System's focus on progressive reforms over monetary radicalism. subsequently declined, and third-party challenges waned as the two major parties consolidated power through and policy concessions.

Realignment Toward the

The presidential election of 1896 marked a critical juncture, solidifying a realignment that transitioned the from the Third Party System to the Fourth, characterized by and a shift toward economic and industrial alignments over sectional divides. secured victory with 271 electoral votes to William Jennings Bryan's 176, capturing 51 percent of the popular vote amid record turnout exceeding 79 percent of eligible voters, reflecting intense mobilization around and economic recovery from the Panic of 1893. This outcome entrenched Republican control of the and , as the fusion of Democrats and Populists behind Bryan failed to overcome business-backed opposition to coinage, leading to the adoption of the gold standard via the Gold Standard Act of 1900. Post-election shifts saw voting blocs reorganize along class and sectoral lines, with urban industrial workers, interests, and much of the Northeast and Midwest aligning durably with Republicans, while the agrarian South remained a Democratic stronghold, often referred to as the "." The defeat marginalized third-party movements like the Populists, whose influence waned as silver agitation subsided and agricultural distress eased with rising commodity prices after 1897, prompting many former Populists to reintegrate into the major parties rather than sustain independent challenges. Republican campaigns, exemplified by Mark Hanna's from industrialists—raising over $3.5 million, unprecedented at the time—underscored the era's pivot to organized, issue-driven emphasizing protectionist tariffs and sound money, which sustained GOP majorities in seven of the next eight presidential contests through 1928. This realignment fostered the Fourth Party System's hallmarks of reduced interparty competition and policy focus on national economic regulation, , and , evident in Republican victories averaging 55 percent of the popular vote in presidential races from to 1908. The Spanish-American War of 1898 further bolstered Republican nationalism, expanding party appeal in emerging urban centers, while internal progressive factions—led by figures like —pushed antitrust measures such as the enforcement and the of 1906, blending conservative fiscal orthodoxy with regulatory interventions. By the early 1900s, the system's stability reflected causal drivers of industrialization and , which favored Republican pro-business stances until the catalyzed further change in 1932, though brief Democratic interruptions like Woodrow Wilson's 1912 win (aided by GOP schism) highlighted underlying tensions over tariffs and banking via the of 1913.

References

  1. https://study.com/academy/lesson/american-political-parties-history-functions-list.html
  2. https://pages.ucsd.edu/~skernell/styled/documents/towardunderstanding19thc.pdf
  3. https://online.norwich.edu/online/about/resource-library/major-american-political-parties-19th-century
  4. http://www.davidwalbert.com/extras/political_parties_poster.pdf
  5. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-us-history/period-6/apush-politics-in-the-gilded-age-lesso/a/politics-in-the-gilded-age
  6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-science-history/article/consensus-and-conflict-a-content-analysis-of-american-party-platforms-18401896/A7CD73C4D4483735CDE1CCFCA60F8AD2
  7. https://millercenter.org/president/franklin-pierce/key-events
  8. https://papersofabrahamlincoln.org/organizations/WH37852
  9. https://www.history.com/articles/whig-party-collapse
  10. https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Kansas_Nebraska_Act.htm
  11. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/kansas-nebraska-act
  12. https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/History/National_History/United_States_History_to_1877_%28Locks_et_al.%29/15%253A_The_Impending_Crisis_%281848-1861%29/15.02%253A_The_Collapse_of_the_Second_Party_System
  13. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3277
  14. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/teaching-resource/historical-context-breakdown-party-system
  15. https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers-and-books/disintegration-second-party-system
  16. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/kansas-nebraska-act
  17. https://blogs.sscnet.ucla.edu/parties/200/republican-party
  18. https://umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/pdf/Lincoln_and_the_Republicans_The_Cause_of_the_War%28PrinterFriendly%29.pdf
  19. https://papersofabrahamlincoln.org/events/E4015686
  20. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/birth-republican-party
  21. https://digital.lib.niu.edu/illinois/lincoln/republican
  22. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3278
  23. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory1os2xmaster/chapter/the-kansas-nebraska-act-and-the-republican-party/
  24. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/civil-war-era/x71a94f19:bleeding-kansas/a/the-kansas-nebraska-act
  25. https://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present
  26. https://www.infoplease.com/us/government/elections/voter-participation-in-presidential-elections-1824-1928
  27. https://www.history.com/articles/voter-turnout-presidential-elections
  28. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/voter-turnout-in-presidential-elections
  29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/204538
  30. https://americanhistory.si.edu/explore/stories/they-marched-torches-getting-out-vote-1840-1900
  31. https://www.neh.gov/humanities/2016/fall/feature/back-when-everyone-knew-how-you-voted
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379420301426
  33. https://origins.osu.edu/read/god-voting-religion-politics
  34. https://www.jofreeman.com/polparties/sexracrel.htm
  35. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/immigrants-conspiracies-and-secret-society-launched-american-nativism-180961915/
  36. https://faculty.winthrop.edu/huffmons/RelAndPolReadings/Gienapp_KnowNothingsAndCreationOfRepublicanParty.pdf
  37. https://hwpi.harvard.edu/files/econ/files/knownothings.pdf?m=1617291525
  38. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216414/
  39. https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-82
  40. https://brilliantmaps.com/us-elections/1860-us-presidential-election/
  41. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/1860
  42. https://brilliantmaps.com/us-elections/1880-us-presidential-election/
  43. https://sds17.pspa.msstate.edu/classes/parties/Weeks2-3.History
  44. https://www.ncpedia.org/sites/default/files/documents/nchist_political-parties-1870.pdf
  45. http://sageamericanhistory.net/gildedage/topics/gildedagepolitics.html
  46. https://spot.colorado.edu/~mcguire/partysys.html
  47. https://origins.osu.edu/article/breaking-hard-do-americas-love-affair-two-party-system
  48. https://libraries.psu.edu/about/collections/unearthing-past-student-research-pennsylvania-history/democratic-party-and-its
  49. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/tariffs-and-the-american-civil-war.html
  50. https://www.nber.org/reporter/winter-1998/9/historical-perspectives-us-trade-policy
  51. https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/homestead-act
  52. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=historydiss
  53. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1860
  54. https://fee.org/articles/civil-war-and-the-american-political-economy/
  55. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-us-history/period-4/apush-the-rise-of-political-parties-and-the-era-of-jefferson-lesson/a/thomas-jefferson-as-president
  56. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/democratic-party-platform-1860-douglas-faction/
  57. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1860-democratic-party-platform
  58. https://mises.org/mises-wire/tariff-question-antebellum-south
  59. https://millercenter.org/president/cleveland/domestic-affairs
  60. https://academic.oup.com/book/51665/chapter/419689328
  61. https://www.cato.org/publications/problem-tariff-american-economic-history-1787-1934
  62. https://mises.org/mises-wire/how-mckinley-tariff-almost-destroyed-republican-party
  63. https://www.independent.org/article/tariffs-early-american-history/
  64. https://www.aei.org/economics/did-tariffs-make-america-great-a-long-read-qa-with-trade-historian-douglas-a-irwin/
  65. https://jacobin.com/2021/02/the-politics-of-a-second-gilded-age
  66. https://fscj.pressbooks.pub/modernushistory/chapter/politics-in-the-gilded-age-1870-1900/
  67. https://www.hoover.org/research/states-rights-and-wrongs
  68. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-gilded-age-and-progressive-era/article/lost-world-of-gilded-age-politics/2A50C11131BFD43321BE7B540486800B
  69. https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=thedialogue
  70. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/essays/gilded-age
  71. https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1860
  72. https://www.270towin.com/1860-election/
  73. https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/the-sectional-crisis/1860-republican-party-platform/
  74. https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/1860
  75. https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1860
  76. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/republican-party-platform-of-1860/
  77. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
  78. https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/south-carolina-declaration-of-secession-1860
  79. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/a-declaration-of-the-immediate-causes-which-induce-and-justify-the-secession-of-the-state-of-mississippi-from-the-federal-union-2/
  80. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_geosec.asp
  81. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/trigger-events-civil-war
  82. https://www.nps.gov/kemo/learn/historyculture/wardeclared.htm
  83. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/the-republican-party-to-1865.html
  84. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/radical-republicans
  85. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1861-1865/blockade
  86. https://veteranlife.com/military-history/copperheads-civil-war
  87. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/union-and-confederate-politics.html
  88. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/davis-jefferson-1808-1889/
  89. https://www.essentialcivilwarcurriculum.com/confederate-government.html
  90. https://www.historynet.com/jefferson-davis-politics-command/
  91. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc108035/
  92. https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/reconstruction-acts-1867-1868
  93. https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/artifact/hr-123-third-reconstruction-act-july-8-1867
  94. https://www.nps.gov/articles/reconstruction.htm
  95. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/14th-amendment
  96. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/intro.6-4/ALDE_00000388/
  97. https://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/BAIC/Historical-Essays/Fifteenth-Amendment/Reconstruction/
  98. https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/FreedmensBureau.htm
  99. https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/african-american-odyssey/reconstruction.html
  100. https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/impeachment/impeachment-johnson.htm
  101. https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1851-1900/The-impeachment-of-President-Andrew-Johnson/
  102. https://guides.hostos.cuny.edu/his211/1-4
  103. https://eh.net/book_reviews/the-greatest-nation-on-earth-republican-economic-policies-during-the-civil-war/
  104. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c13855/c13855.pdf
  105. https://www.atlantafed.org/blogs/-/media/CFBC939B67FA46169DA711319F15FDD2.ashx
  106. https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/rise-of-industrial-america-1876-1900/railroads-in-late-19th-century/
  107. https://www.nationalmaterial.com/brief-history-american-steel-industry/
  108. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-ushistory1/chapter/economic-development-during-the-civil-war-and-reconstruction/
  109. https://www.thoughtco.com/the-spoils-system-1773347
  110. https://www.americanhistorycentral.com/entries/spoils-system/
  111. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/political-science/spoils-system
  112. https://millercenter.org/president/grant/domestic-affairs
  113. https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2000/fall/whiskey-ring-1
  114. https://www.americanheritage.com/ulysses-s-grant-and-whisky-frauds
  115. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/november-23/boss-tweed-delivered-to-authorities
  116. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3052
  117. https://www.thecollector.com/american-political-machines-history/
  118. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/reconstruction-myth/
  119. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/exhibits/reconstruction/introduction.html
  120. https://www.history.com/articles/gilded-age-corruption-corporate-wealth
  121. https://pressbooks.nvcc.edu/ushistory/chapter/20-2/
  122. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bland-Allison-Act
  123. https://www.britannica.com/event/Sherman-Silver-Purchase-Act
  124. https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1851-1900/The-McKinley-Tariff-of-1890/
  125. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3185
  126. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3189
  127. http://www.illinoislaborhistory.org/the-haymarket-affair
  128. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/haymarket-affair-1886
  129. https://aflcio.org/about/history/labor-history-events/1892-homestead-strike
  130. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/carnegie-strike-homestead-mill/
  131. https://www.nps.gov/pull/learn/historyculture/the-strike-of-1894.htm
  132. https://www.rbhayes.org/research/hayes-historical-journal-the-gilded-age-in-american-history/
  133. https://open.baypath.edu/his115/chapter/inequality-and-urban-life/
  134. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Prohibition-Party
  135. https://www.britannica.com/event/Greenback-movement
  136. https://fiveable.me/key-terms/apush/greenback-party
  137. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3126
  138. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3741456
  139. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2os2xmaster/chapter/farmers-revolt-in-the-populist-era/
  140. https://digital.lib.niu.edu/illinois/gildedage/populism
  141. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/essays/populism-and-agrarian-discontent
  142. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2355&context=fhq
  143. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/history/us-history-ii/politics-farming-empire-18761900/the-revolt-of-the-farmers
  144. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/populist-party-platform-1892
  145. https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-1002
  146. https://millercenter.org/president/mckinley/campaigns-and-elections
  147. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-ushistory2/chapter/the-decline-of-the-populist-party/
  148. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/the-populist-party-platform/
  149. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-us-history/period-6/apush-politics-in-the-gilded-age-lesso/a/the-populists
  150. https://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5354/
  151. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/the-cross-of-gold-speech/
  152. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/1896
  153. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3128
  154. https://www.history.com/articles/rural-urban-divide-1896-election
  155. https://www.historyonthenet.com/election-1896-william-mckinley-r-v-william-jennings-bryan-d
  156. https://blogs.messiah.edu/politicsinternationalrelations/2020/05/27/the-fourth-party-system-was-it-really-a-realignment/
  157. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/blog/william-mckinley-and-the-first-modern-presidential-election/
  158. https://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jcampbel/documents/SSHRealignment06.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.