The Presidency of James Buchanan

The First Few Months of The Presidency that Lead to the Civil War

2. The Inauguration of James Buchanan— The Trip to Washington—The Dred Scott Case—An Examination of the Inaugural Address—Cabinet Appointment

When you think of an Inauguration, you think of modern times. Seeing marching bands, flower fields, American flags being waved in the air, and thousands of people crowded onto the lawn of the Capitol building. When James Buchanan was Inaugurated in March of 1857, it was no different.

One thing that was different was the way of transportation to get to Washington D.C. Buchanan was lucky in this sense because Wheatland, where he resided, was fairly close. This is comparing the hundreds of miles his predecessors took.

When the chariot reached Wheatland on March 2^nd, Buchanan, and his niece, Harriet Lane rode along with him. Mrs. Lane would be Buchanan’s First Lady[1] for the entirety of the term. He would receive no formal escort to the train station that day. The train that he would ride to Washington was lavishly decorated with a sense of patriotism, and memories of his home at Wheatland.

When Buchanan’s friends and family boarded the train, they received a message that hundreds of anti-Buchanan Know-Nothings were protesting his pilgrimage to Washington.   Here, the protesters caused chaos so much that the president-elect needed to be escorted by armed men to his hotel.

            We do not know if these Know-Nothings were armed. If they were, there could have easily been an assassination attempt on Buchanan. If Buchanan were to be assassinated that day, there would have been a constitutional crisis. John Tyler, who assumed office after the death of William Henry Harrison, had to deal with accusations of being illegitimate but Harrison took the oath; if Buchanan had died before taking the oath, what would have happened? The principle of Presidential succession called for the Vice President, in this case, John C, Breckinridge, to become president. The role of the vice president would have gone to either the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Senate Pro tempore.[2]

            This incident is theoretical. Buchanan would live to see his full term as President. This event of assassination attempts almost happened to Buchanan’s successor, Abraham Lincoln while on his way to Washington. But if Buchanan had been assassinated or somewhat injured that day, history would have looked very different.

            Buchanan would arrive on the day of his Inauguration. The previous day, he had been stuck in bed with dysentery which prevented him from doing much, including making last-minute cabinet appointments.  He would recover enough to be able to execute his Inaugural address on the 4^th of March. That day, he was bombarded with congratulations, Americans waving the American flag banners, bells ringing, marching bands, preparation for that evening’s banquet, people crowding onto the lawn of the capitol building, the Supreme Court, lame-duck Franklin Pierce, congressmen, family members, Americans, vice president-elect, Breckinridge, and people of high social classes.   

            Vice-President would take the oath of Vice President first in the Senate Chamber. Groups of people showed up at this event until the moment came. Ageing Chief Justice Roger Taney stumbled to the capitol building to have a short meeting with President-elect Buchanan. Chief Justice Taney was to inform Buchanan of the major Dred Scott Case that had taken months to decide.  Dred Scott was a slave who had been trying to win his freedom since 1846. About ten years later, this case was still not fully settled by then; so, Scott took the matter to the Supreme Court.[3]

            This case became one of the worst decisions in Supreme Court History. The Decision was 7-2, authored by Chief Justice Taney who declared that, “The Constitution of the United States recognises slaves as property, and pledges the Federal Government to protect it. And Congress cannot exercise any more authority over property of that description than it may constitutionally exercise over property of any other kind.”[4]

            Therefore, the Supreme Court declared that Dred Scot was not a citizen of the United States thus not getting the enumeration of rights listed in The Bill of Rights. Taney also includes that, “The general words above quoted (The Declaration of Independence) would seem to embrace the whole human family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be so understood. But it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race was not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration; for if the language, as understood in that day, would embrace them, the conduct of the distinguished men who framed the Declaration of Independence would have been utterly and flagrantly inconsistent with the principles they asserted; and instead of the sympathy of mankind, to which they so confidently appealed, they would have deserved and received universal rebuke and reprobation.”[5]

            President-elect Buchanan would quickly add this injury to his Inaugural Address. How Buchanan reacted directly to the Dred Scott Case is not recorded. But the North, particularly Abolitionists, were enraged by the case. To the Dred Scott Case, Abraham Lincoln, who was running for the senate in 1858, wrote of the Dred Scott Decision:

“Such separation, is ever effected at all, must be effected by colonization; and no political party, as such, is now doing anything directly for colonization. Party operations at present only favor or retard colonization incidentally. The enterprise is a difficult one; but ‘when there is a will there is a way;’ and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be. The children of Israel, to such numbers as to include four hundred thousand fighting men, went out of Egyptian bondage in a body.”[6]

Buchanan’s belief that Slavery is under the jurisdiction of what the United States Constitution can do to interfere in Slavery, is certainly a correct interpretation.   This is to be believed because of what he stated in his Inaugural Address.  When the moment came to take the oath, Buchanan was prepared to give his Inaugural Address.

The most significant part of Buchanan’s Inaugural address is views on Slavery are exposed. To the question of slavery in expanding within Kansa and Nebraska, Buchanan wrote: “This is, happily, a matter of but little practical importance. Besides, it is a judicial question, which legitimately belongs to the Supreme Court of the United States, before whom it is now pending, and will, it is understood, be speedily and finally settled.” Later Buchanan states, “The whole territorial question being thus settled upon the principle of popular sovereignty — a principle as ancient as free government itself — everything of a practical nature has been decided. No other question remains for adjustment; because all agree that, under the Constitution, Slavery in the States is beyond the reach of any human power, except that of the respective States themselves wherein it exists May we not, then, hope that the long agitation on this subject is approaching its end, and that the geographical parties to which it has given birth, so much dreaded by the Father of his Country, will speedily become extinct?”[7]

Here, Buchanan’s views are stated as clearly as possible. Buchanan believes in a popular severity, calling it a “principle.”  Buchanan believes that the issue of slavery is in the hands of the judicial branch. And he believes that neither the executive nor the legislative branches have the power to interfere with slavery.   

Southerners believed that the issue that divided the nation was not slavery but the idea of individual state rights. They thought that they had a fundamental right given by the constitution, to own slaves.  When interpreting the Constitution, it is to be known that the Constitution didn’t directly say that the United States Government could interfere with slavery; so, the Southerners believed this to be true.  For the new Republican, which would become mainstream by the Presidential Election of 1856, it based itself on an anti-slavery basis.

Buchanan who affiliated himself with the Democratic party. The Democratic, by then was the party that supported the expansion of slavery; Buchanan was a northerner meaning that he is known by the political term, ‘Doughface.” A doughface is a politician who is from the North but follows southern principles.

There is a possibility that Buchanan, who was originally a Jacksonian Democrat stuck to the traditions of the Democratic Party. Andrew Jackson owned about 150 slaves by the time of his death. Buchanan was opposed to the national bank and of Tariffs and an adherent to states’ rights something he would follow for the rest of his political career.

The Democratic Party of 1856 was different from the one of 1828. Slavery was not considered an immediate issue. Instead, it was held off.  The problem of slavery continued to rise when more and more states were admitted to the union. During the Mexican-American war, the United States won half of the land it has today. This land includes California, a bigger state that would remain free under the Compromise of 1850.  And every time a new state was admitted to the union, the inhabitants of that state would declare whether the state would be free or slave. This belief in popular Sovereignty derives from the state’s rights issue, in which Buchanan was an upholder of States’ rights.  Popular Sovereignty continued to be considered law when the Kansa-Nebraska Act was passed, giving said states the complete authority to choose if their state would include slavery.  And the states of Kansa and Nebraska are above that line of latitude established by the Missouri Compromise, meaning that slavery was forbidden to those states or territories; however, with the passage of the Kansa-Nebraska Act, this line of latitude is erased, and slavery would expand north of that line of latitude.   

Democrats had two different branches: peace and war Democrats. The war Democrats, which included Vice President Breckinridge, were considered to be extreme. whether or not James Buchanan was a war or a peace democrat, there is a definite answer. Every president who has served as president had one goal: “To preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States;” this was the goal of each president. They wanted the government, and the legacy of the founders, to be preserved. This was a principle stated in each presidential oath of office. Therefore, I believe that James Buchanan was a peace democrat but had tendencies of Southern interest and had no intention of succession.

It was November 6^th, 1856, Buchanan was on track to win the presidency, and while announcing that the Democrats had won Pennsylvania and Indiana, he criticized the North. The people of the North seem to have forgotten the warning of the Father of his Country against geographical parties,” Buchanan stated. “and by far the most dangerous of all such parties is that of a combined North against a combined South on the question of slavery. This is no mere political question — no question addressing itself to the material interests of men. It rises far higher. With the South, it is a question of self-preservation, of personal security around the family altar, of life or of death. The Southern people still cherish a love for the Union; but what to them is even our blessed confederacy, the wisest and the best form of government ever devised by man, if they cannot enjoy its blessings and its benefits without being in constant alarm for their wives and children.” [8]     

Buchanan was a man of his country. He was sometimes too accommodating to the Southern cause.   He wanted everyone to be happy but in the world of politics, sometimes that is not a reality.  Buchanan pledged not to seek re-election in his inaugural address and was true to his agreement.   

          One of the most necessary principles set by President Washington was establishing a cabinet.  James Buchanan was making arrangements days before his inauguration. About a week before he left for Washington, he wrote to a correspondent: “Gen. Cass is to be my Secretary of State, & no Englishman need feel the least uneasiness on this account. His Anglophobia, as you used facetiously to term it, if it ever existed, no longer exists. His age, his patriotism, his long & able public services, his unsullied private character, & the almost universal feeling in his favor rendered his appointment peculiarly appropriate.” [9]  

            Lewis Cass, who had been in politics since the time of James Madison, had served in the War of 1812 at the Battle of the Thames as Brigadier General. He then went on to serve in the cabinet of Andrew Jackson as his Secretary of War, served as United States Ambassador to France, and senator from Michigan. He was one of the most experienced men in Washington. He was up there with the resume of the president himself.   In the presidential election of 1848, Lewis Cass ran for president (beating Buchanan for the nomination) against Whig Candidate Zachery Taylor. 

            Buchanan’s choice of Lewis Cass was a wise one. He wasn’t biased in his appointments. He chose Cass precisely and based on their experiences. He wanted the right people to represent the country which was crumbling. Buchanan himself knew the position of foreign affairs well and thought Cass was a good representative of what a true American stood for. However, Buchanan did not make precise appointments for the rest of his cabinet. One academic study of the Buchanan presidency, said of Cass’s appointment to secretary of state, that the problem of finding a secretary of state, “…was solved by appointing the aged, fat, and senile Lewis Cass of Michigan…”[10]  Was this statement by Elbert Smith a hyperbole? Maybe; by the time of Cass’s appointment, he was 75 years old. People believed that Willam L. Marcy, President Pierce’s secretary of state, had a chance of staying in his position.  In the world of James Buchanan, it is to be considered that Cass’s appointment was based on merit. Or it Cass’s appointment could have been due to Cass’s political beliefs. Cass was devout to the state’s rights movement. He also believed in popular sovereignty     

            Buchanan would only pick Democrat constituents, which was not a surprising factor. However, his cabinet was cursed with what I will consider “incompetence.” For instance, Howell Cobb, Buchanan’s Secretary of the Treasury, resigned his position to join the Confederacy, and so did John Floyd, Secretary of War, who became a Confederate General and died at the Battle of Fort Donelson. Jeremiah Black was portably the most component member. He would serve as Attorney General and remain in the Buchanan Cabinet for the full four years. So did Secretary of the Navy, Isaac Toucey. Aaron V. Brown, Postmaster General, died in office in 1859, and Jacob Thompson, Secretary of the Interior, joined the Confederacy.

            Buchanan considered other options for his secretary of state; his first choice was Robert J. Walker of Mississippi, who worked along with Buchanan in the Polk administration.  Walker was a traditional Jacksonian Democrat and was a perfect fit for the job. But Buchanan chose not to appoint him; this was due to Walker’s beliefs on slavery. Walker is by no means a war Democrat. His son served in the Union Army. Walker was a massive slave owner, but he believed in the gradual emancipation of slaves. I believe this because when he was appointed Territorial Governor of Kansas, he resigned due to his opposition to the popular sovereignty of the state.  Walker was opposed to the new Lecompton Constitution in Lecompton, Kansas which introduced popular sovereignty and was extremely pro-slavery.

            The next person of discussion is Howell Cobb, a man who turned from a unionist to one of the founders of the Confederacy and would become Buchanan’s Secretary of State.  The story of Howell Cobb is a unique one; as the nation became more divided, Cobb’s views began to change.  Cobb originally supported keeping the union intact and was a supporter of the Compromise of 1850. Cobb would actually be the one to swear in Jefferson Davis as President of the Confederacy. 

            For Buchanan’s Secretary of War, Buchanan chose John B. Floyd. Floyd is among the 3^rd of Buchanan’s cabinet that joined the Confederacy. The Floyds were among some of the most popular names in Virginia. His father, also named John Floyd, was governor of Virginia. John B. Floyd would also go on to serve as Virginia governor. Floyd would soon prove himself to be incompetent in his position. He was so inept of his duties, that Ulysse S. Grant, wrote of him in his memoir: “Floyd, the Secretary of War, scattered the army so that much of it could be captured when hostilities should commence, and distributed the cannon and small arms from Northern arsenals throughout the South so as to be on hand when treason wanted them.”[11]

            It is evident that the Buchanan administration was filled with incompetence For the Postmaster General position, Buchanan chose Aaron V. Brown, who would die in office. Brown was a slaveholder, but he would prove himself to be one of the strongest members of the Buchanan Administration. Brown had no notable views on slavery other than his inability to criticize any side.  

            Buchana chose Jeremiah S. Black for Attorney General. Black was a studious lawyer and former Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Black was a man who chose no side and was neutral when it came to factions. He believed in what the law said and only that. Thus, Black was a perfect fit for Attorney General. In a letter days after President Buchanan’s inauguration, Buchanan wrote Judge Black informing him of his appointment. Buchanan stated that, “have this moment signed your commission as Attorney General of the United States, and I have done this with great pleasure. I hope you may find it agreeable to yourself to accept this important office ; and I entertain no doubt that we shall get on harmoniously and happily together. There were certainly great difficulties in the way of your appointment…”[12]

            For Secretary of the Interior, the newest cabinet position, Buchanan chose Jacob Thompson, a man whom I considered to be an extremist. He was a subordinate politician who was the least experienced out of the entire cabinet.  Thompson was a Southern sympathizer and would become affiliated with the Confederacy. He would become Inspector General of the Confederate Army and serve at the Battle of Shiloh.

            The Buchanan administration can be considered one of the worst cabinets in American political history. About a third of the cabinet would end up joining the secessionist movement. President Buchanan’s cabinet appointments show his utter incompetence to prove himself a leader of a crumbling nation.  James Buchanan was seeking something that wasn’t a reality. He wanted a unity cabinet but was unable to execute that goal. Buchanan didn’t realize how serious the situation of succession was. The issue of succession was not going to disappear. Soon, all of the tension would blow up.        

---

[2] This is what would have happened under the Presidential Succession Act of 1792. The incident described was before the ratification of section 4 of the 20^th Amendment.

[3] Scott was originally owned by Petter Blow who sold Scott to an Army Surgeon, Dr. John Emerson. During that time, he married Harriet Robinson. Scott believed that because of where he was stationed, Fort Snelling, where modern-day Minnesota is, that he was considered a free man. This was due to the fact that slavery, was prohibited in the Territory of the Northwest Ordinance and the Missouri Compromise.

[4] A Legal Review of Case of Dred Scott As Decided By The Supreme Court of The United States, Volume 1,  Section 4, Clause 4. 1973,  Originally Published in 1857.    

[5] [5] A Legal Review of Case of Dred Scott As Decided By The Supreme Court of The United States, Volume 1, Page 20,  1973,  Originally Published in 1857.   

[6] The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, Edited by Roy E. Basler and his associates, 9 volumes, 2:409, (henceforth referred to as CW, of Lincoln.)

[7] The Works of James Buchanan, Vol. 10, edited by John Bassett Moore (henceforth, CW.)

[8] CW, 10:96

[9] CW, 10:103.

[10] The Presidency of James Buchanan by Elbert Smith, 18, 1975. (Henceforth, Elbert Smith, #

[11] Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, produced by the Library of America, edited by Mary Drake McFeely and Willam S. McFeely.  

[12]CW, 10:114