In 1845, the United States possessed a distinctive political and constitutional structure balancing federal and state power, which profoundly shaped emerging national conflicts.
Structure of the Federal Government
The United States operated as a federal republic, meaning that authority was divided between a central (federal) government and individual state governments. This division stemmed directly from the US Constitution, which defined powers explicitly granted to each level of government and reserved remaining powers for the states.
Division of Powers
Federal Powers: Included areas such as foreign diplomacy, the raising and maintenance of a national army and navy, regulation of interstate and international trade, coining money, and conducting war.
State Powers: Retained authority over education, local law enforcement, internal infrastructure, and most aspects of civil and criminal law. States also controlled voting rights and suffrage qualifications, contributing to significant regional differences.
Concurrent Powers: Some powers were shared, such as the ability to tax, maintain courts, and build roads.
This federal system was designed to limit centralised authority, reflecting the Founding Fathers’ fear of tyranny. However, by 1845, this balance was increasingly strained by disputes over slavery, economic development, and westward expansion.
Role and Powers of the President
The President of the United States was (and remains) the executive head of the federal government, responsible for enforcing federal laws and acting as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.
Presidential Powers
Enforcement of Laws: The President ensured that laws passed by Congress were carried out effectively, overseeing federal agencies.
Veto Power: Could reject legislation passed by Congress, although Congress could override a veto with a two-thirds majority.
Foreign Affairs: Managed diplomatic relations, negotiated treaties (which required Senate approval), and directed national foreign policy.
Appointments: Nominated federal judges, ambassadors, and key government officials, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Military Command: Directed the army and navy during conflict but could not declare war independently — this power belonged to Congress.
Limits on Presidential Authority
The President’s powers were checked and balanced by the other two branches of government — Congress and the Supreme Court — ensuring no single branch could dominate the republic.
The US Constitution: Foundations and Key Features
The US Constitution, ratified in 1787, remained the fundamental legal document in 1845. It was a relatively short but highly significant document, creating a system of limited government with embedded safeguards against the concentration of power.
Balance of Power
The Constitution established three separate branches of government:
Legislative Branch (Congress): Made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate, responsible for creating federal laws, declaring war, and controlling federal spending.
Executive Branch (President and Administration): Implemented and enforced laws.
Judicial Branch (Supreme Court and Lower Federal Courts): Interpreted laws and settled disputes.
This separation ensured a system of checks and balances, preventing any branch from becoming too powerful.
Slavery and the Constitution
Slavery was a central tension embedded within the constitutional framework. Although the word "slavery" did not appear explicitly in the original text, several clauses protected it indirectly:
Three-Fifths Compromise: Counted enslaved people as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes, giving slaveholding states greater influence in the House of Representatives.
Fugitive Slave Clause: Required that escaped enslaved people be returned to their owners, even if they fled to free states.
Slave Trade Clause: Prohibited Congress from banning the international slave trade before 1808, after which importation was technically outlawed but illegal smuggling continued.
These provisions reflected the compromises made to secure unity among the states but became sources of intense division as the country expanded westward.
Representation
Representation in Congress balanced the interests of large and small states and the differing regional economies:
House of Representatives: Representation based on population, benefiting larger states and regions with higher populations (including enslaved populations counted under the Three-Fifths rule).
Senate: Each state, regardless of size, received two senators, protecting the interests of smaller states and ensuring regional parity.
This structure meant that Southern states could exert substantial influence, especially when aligned with sympathetic Northern Democrats.
Checks and Balances
Legislative Checks: Congress could impeach and remove the President or federal judges.
Executive Checks: The President could veto bills and nominate judges.
Judicial Checks: The Supreme Court could declare laws or executive actions unconstitutional, exercising judicial review.
This intricate system ensured that no branch could act unilaterally, though it also created potential for political deadlock, particularly on divisive issues like slavery.
The Supreme Court: Influence and Authority
The Supreme Court stood as the highest authority on constitutional interpretation, shaping federal and state relations through its rulings.
Role and Powers
Judicial Review: Established in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison (1803), this power allowed the Court to declare acts of Congress or presidential actions unconstitutional, effectively shaping the law of the land.
Federal vs. State Authority: The Court often ruled on conflicts between federal and state laws, sometimes strengthening federal authority and at other times protecting state sovereignty.
Slavery Cases: By 1845, the Court had already signalled its willingness to protect slaveholders’ rights, contributing to the South’s confidence in the institution as a defender of their interests.
Key Characteristics
Lifetime Appointment: Justices served for life (unless impeached), insulating them from direct political pressure and allowing them to make unpopular but constitutionally sound decisions.
Appellate Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court primarily heard appeals from lower courts, providing a final verdict on contentious legal questions.
Federalism and Sectional Tension
By 1845, the federal system that balanced power between national and state governments was under strain. While designed to prevent tyranny, it provided fertile ground for regional disagreements, particularly over:
Tariffs and Economic Policy: The North generally supported high tariffs to protect industry, while the South preferred free trade to benefit agricultural exports.
Internal Improvements: Debates raged over federal funding for roads, canals, and railways, with Southern states often opposing projects seen as favouring Northern commerce.
Slavery Expansion: As new territories were added, disputes erupted over whether these should allow slavery, testing the limits of federal compromise and state sovereignty.
Though the Constitution was revered as the bedrock of American democracy, by 1845 it was increasingly seen by different regions through contrasting lenses. For many Northerners, it embodied principles of liberty and gradual reform; for Southerners, it protected their economic system based on enslaved labour and states’ rights. These divergent interpretations laid the groundwork for escalating disputes that would eventually lead to the Civil War.
This complex and sometimes contradictory political framework made the United States uniquely flexible yet fragile, a union of states continually negotiating the boundaries between federal power and local autonomy. Understanding this system is vital to grasp the roots of sectional conflict that defined American politics in the mid-nineteenth century.
FAQ
By 1845, the principle of states’ rights was deeply embedded in American political culture and was often invoked to justify resistance to federal authority. Many Southern politicians and thinkers argued that states had voluntarily joined the Union and therefore retained the ultimate right to govern themselves, especially on issues not explicitly delegated to the federal government. This ideology became a cornerstone for defending slavery, as Southern leaders claimed that any attempt by Congress to restrict slavery in the territories or within state borders violated state sovereignty. The concept also shaped debates over tariffs and economic regulation, with Southern states opposing federal measures they believed unfairly benefited Northern industrial interests. States’ rights rhetoric therefore became a powerful political tool, framing the federal government as an overreaching threat to local self-government. This idea hardened sectional identities, laying ideological groundwork for secessionist arguments that would be fully realised in the lead-up to the Civil War.
In 1845, political parties played a vital role in shaping how Americans understood and applied the Constitution. The two main parties at the time were the Democrats and the Whigs. Democrats generally advocated a strict constructionist view, believing that the federal government should exercise only powers explicitly stated in the Constitution, leaving most other powers to the states. This view was popular in the South and Western states, where local control and the protection of slavery were paramount. The Whigs, conversely, supported a more flexible, loose constructionist interpretation. They argued for a stronger federal government capable of promoting economic development through national banks, protective tariffs, and internal improvements. This position was more popular in the industrialising North. Consequently, partisan rivalry was not merely political but constitutional, influencing legislation, Supreme Court nominations, and public debates. Party interpretations therefore deeply affected how federalism functioned in practice and how constitutional disputes over power distribution evolved.
In 1845, the federal government primarily raised revenue through tariffs and customs duties on imported goods rather than direct taxation. The Constitution granted Congress the power to levy taxes, duties, and excises, but direct taxes were politically unpopular and rarely used. Instead, tariffs became the main source of income, funding the relatively modest federal budget, which covered the army, navy, diplomatic corps, postal service, and infrastructure development. High tariffs were favoured by many in the North as they protected burgeoning industries from foreign competition. Conversely, Southern states, which relied heavily on exporting cash crops like cotton and importing manufactured goods, opposed high tariffs, seeing them as economically harmful and an unfair burden. These economic disagreements over tariff policy often fuelled wider constitutional debates about federal power and states’ rights. The reliance on tariffs also meant that fluctuations in international trade could significantly impact federal revenue, influencing political and fiscal stability in the pre-Civil War era.
The system of checks and balances designed by the Constitution deeply influenced presidential decision-making in 1845 by ensuring that the President could not act without constraint. Every significant executive action required awareness of congressional approval or potential judicial scrutiny. For example, while the President could negotiate treaties and appoint key officials, both actions needed the Senate’s consent, often forcing presidents to consider political alliances and legislative support carefully. The President’s veto power over congressional bills was a powerful tool but risky to use excessively, as it could be overridden by a two-thirds majority and might damage relations with Congress. Additionally, Supreme Court rulings could declare presidential acts unconstitutional, as the judiciary had the final say on interpreting the Constitution. These constraints meant that presidents often had to compromise with Congress and navigate public opinion to push through policies, especially in a politically divided landscape. This system balanced executive ambition with legislative and judicial oversight, shaping cautious and calculated governance.
In 1845, the composition and appointment process of the Supreme Court significantly shaped its influence and credibility. Justices were nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, ensuring that appointments reflected the political priorities of both branches. As justices served for life, presidents viewed nominations as opportunities to leave a lasting ideological legacy, selecting candidates who aligned with their interpretation of the Constitution and policy goals. By 1845, the Court was widely perceived as conservative, often favouring property rights and upholding slavery-related interests. Its lifetime tenure insulated justices from political pressure but could also entrench certain viewpoints for decades, even as public opinion shifted. The Court’s relatively small size—typically six to nine justices—meant each member wielded significant influence. Because justices were often drawn from different regions, geographical balance also mattered, ensuring that sectional interests were indirectly represented. This composition helped the Court maintain authority as an impartial arbiter, even as its rulings increasingly influenced the contentious balance between federal and state powers.
Practice Questions
Explain the significance of the division of powers between federal and state governments in the USA in 1845.
The division of powers between federal and state governments in 1845 was significant because it maintained a balance intended to prevent tyranny and protect individual liberty. However, this arrangement also allowed states considerable autonomy, particularly on contentious issues like slavery. Southern states relied on states’ rights arguments to defend slavery and resist federal interference, deepening regional tensions. The federal government’s limited reach meant resolving disputes often proved difficult, fuelling sectional conflicts. This constitutional framework therefore directly contributed to rising disagreements that would eventually erupt into the American Civil War.
How important was the role of the Supreme Court in maintaining the balance of power in the USA in 1845?
In 1845, the Supreme Court was crucial in maintaining the constitutional balance of power by interpreting laws and settling disputes between federal and state authorities. Through judicial review, the Court could strike down unconstitutional laws, ensuring no branch exceeded its authority. Its decisions often reinforced federal supremacy but occasionally protected states’ interests, shaping the federal structure. The Court’s perceived bias towards protecting slavery bolstered Southern confidence in legal support for their system. Consequently, the Supreme Court acted both as a stabilising force and an institution that sometimes intensified sectional divisions within the Union.
