The Eaton Affair

The so called Eaton Affair has two very distinct lessons to show modern historians.  The first one is a very broad view of morality in the United States and how it interacted in politics of the time.  In Howe’s book “What Hath God Wrought” he touches on the Eaton Affair and makes one particularly interesting observation.  He says that “some of the foreign diplomat’s wives were willing to socialize with Margaret Eaton because they took for granted the behavior of European courts and the need set aside morality in the interest of politics. American women were not so trained” (Howe 336).  This gives historians a glimpse into the culture of the day and an interesting view of how American politics intersected with morality versus European politics and intersected with morality. 

The second aspect of the “Eaton Affair,” that deserves closer examination by historians is Jackson’s reaction to the scandal.  He immediately goes to the aid of the lady.  This gives a deeper view into Jackson’s character and perhaps does not make the man all that full of contradictions.  As Kristen Wood states “men who loved Jackson for protecting the rights of the farmer and the mechanic against the banker and the manufacturer also identified with the hero who insisted on his right and duty to avenge a defenseless woman and rebuke disloyal dependents” (Woods 243).  This scandal shows how Jackson’s “honor” is a common theme throughout his presidency.  He ran to the side he felt needed his aid, whether he was right at his assessment is up for debate.  Whether cause was against gossip of “moral” wives or against “corrupt” political deals or against those whom he viewed threatened the state of the union he always viewed himself as the hero riding in to protect the people of the United States.  Whether he was or not, Jackson always saw himself as the defender of the weak.

Howe, Daniel Walker. What Hath God Wrought. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Wood, Kristen E. One Woman so Dangerous to Public Morals: Gender and Power in the Eaton            Affair. Journal of the Early Republic , Vol. 17, No. 2 (Summer, 1997), pp. 237-275.

American Politics

            Ronald Formisano brings up the interesting point that many scholars believe that the development of the two-party system in this country created greater democratization and gave rise to grass root causes.  This would give individual citizens from the frontier areas in the early 1800s.  This time period would see the rise of the Democratic party and the seeds of what would become the Whig party. 

            During The Era of Good Feeling is often cited as the period of United States history that America had only one party, this is untrue.  Looking at the presidential race of 1824 it is easy to see the fracturing or the Republican Party.  I would go even further and say that this country was founded on a two party system.  Certainly not formally declared factions but since before the Constitutional Convention the issue of strong federal government versus “state rights” has consumed the American political scene.  This issue consumed politics all through the Era of Good Feeling and was a major stance during the election of 1824 under the guise of “internal improvements.”  This issue is with the U.S, even today as this is a major platform piece for the Democratic and Republican Parties of today.

            The debate of “state rights” and “strong federal government” started with the debates of the Constitutional Congress and moved along into the early 1800s with the debates for internal improvements and the Bank of the U.S. and later into the slave debate.  The debate continues today with Gun rights and Gay marriage, asking “should these issues be solved by the state or should the Federal government.”  As long as America has a democratic system it will be a two party system one to represent the state argument and one to represent the federal argument.  In this sense Formisano and other scholars are correct in feeling that the multiple-party system created greater democratization.

Formisano, Ronald P. “Deferential- Participant Politics:  The Early Republic’s Political Culture, 1789-1840.” American Political Science Review 68 (1974): 473-487 (http://www.jstor.org/stable/1959497)

Howe, Daniel Walker. What Hath God Wrought. New York: Oxford University Press. 2007.