The Election of 1800: A Model of Crazy, Dirty Campaigning. Today is election day! As we are all aware, every two years in this grand nation of ours citizens invoke their right to elect the candidates to office whom they feel best represent their views, hopes and goals for the future. It is a time-honored practice that we as a nation have enjoyed (to differing degrees of course) for more than two centuries. And as is the case with these election cycles, negative ads have become a staple item on the menu of American political dialogue. Virtually every candidate for almost every office up for grabs in today's election has engaged in some form of "mud-slinging" towards his/her opponent. Whether it takes the form of automated phone calls, mailed letters, television commercials or radio sound bites, this election has, for the most part, been like those of recent history: a dog fight. The attacks didn't stop with mere broadsides. Is uniformity attainable?
To capitalize on these comments, the Adams campaign took swift action. The reign of Mr. Destiny Quest. The Supreme Court . The First Hundred Years . Landmark Cases . McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) A pro-Andrew Jackson political cartoon applauds the president's September 1833 order for the removal of federal deposits from the Bank of the United States. On the right, Jackson, cheered on by Major Jack Downing, holds aloft a scroll with the words "Order for the Removal of Public Money. " To the left, the combined opposition to the president's move -- represented by Bank President Nicholas Biddle, Whig Senators Daniel Webster and Henry Clay, and the pro-Bank press -- are ridiculed. Reproduction courtesy of the Library of Congress McCulloch v. Finally, the Court held that the "sovereignty" (political authority) of the Union lies with the people of the United States, not with the individual states that comprise it.
If Marbury v. The Supreme Court . Capitalism and Conflict . Landmark Cases . Fletcher v. Peck (1810) In Fletcher v. Peck, the Court ruled that Georgia did not have the constitutional authority to revoke a corrupt land sale. Above, an illustration of Georgia State Senator James Jackson destroying records connecting him to the Yazoo land sale. Reproduction courtesy of the Georgia Historical Society Fletcher v. Peck (1810) The dispute in the case arose in 1795, when the Georgia legislature granted some 35 million acres of state land, involving vast tracts around the Yazoo River in what is now Alabama and Mississippi, to private speculators for the bargain price of 1.5 cents per acre.
It was soon discovered that all but one of the legislators who voted for the grant had been bribed. The Supreme Court, in a 4-1 decision written by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled that Georgia had violated the Contract Clause of the Constitution when it repealed the grants. Www.whha.org/whha_publications/publications_documents/whitehousehistory_07.pdf. Marbury_vs_Madison. The Federalist #78. CONGRESS: HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES Debate on the bill received from the Senate, entitled, "An Act to repeal certain acts respecting the organization of the courts of the United States." - ProQuest Historical Newspapers: Hartford Courant (1764-1922) - ProQ.
Google Scholar. Sweet Search. Student Research Center - powered by EBSCOhost: Basic Search. Academic OneFile - Basic Search. MLA / APA / Chicago Bibliography Composer, Notecards, Outlining. Historical Newspapers. Basic Search - ProQuest Historical Newspapers: Hartford Courant (1764-1922)