of which was declared by President Biddle to be the relief of the general government from the embarrassments which followed upon the policy of Jackson in destroying the existing banking system. Back of the refusal of Biddle to enter a conference whose purpose was not to institute a resumption of specie payment but to agree upon a time when that resumption might wisely be inaugurated, was his hope that the administration might find itself in an inextricable mesh which would require a change of parties to restore financial stability to the government and to the country. He hoped that the by-elections of the fall of 1837 would result in a Whig majority in Congress through which the national bank might secure reëstablishment.

Although the meeting was blocked by the position of Biddle, the resumption of specie payment took place in New York, May 10, 1838, and this action was followed by the banks of the country generally with the exception of the United States Bank of Pennsylvania. That institution, as we have intimated, preferred to take chances upon future developments. Its attitude is characterized in an article in the North American Review of January, 1844, as follows: "The country was then (end of 1837) in a condition to resume the payment of specie through its banks. But the United States Bank of Pennsylvania and some other great institutions were not ready. During the years of high prices, they had lent their capital on paper which rested only on the exaggerated and unreal values of that period, and an immediate return to specie payments would have shown that their capital had been very seriously impaired. The United States Bank of Pennsylvania, therefore, at first opposed the resumption of specie payments, and subsequently, when compelled to come into the arrangement, it seems to have adopted the bold measure of attempting to bring back the unnatural state of things which had existed before May, 1837; hoping that, by means of high prices and unlimited credit, it might be able gradually to withdraw itself from its dangerous position. It entered largely into the purchase

of State stocks, speculations in cotton, and other transactions. It was impossible, in the nature of things, that this scheme should succeed, but it had some effect. Many began to think that the reverses of 1837 were small affairs, and that they were already overcome. . . Our foreign commercial debt had been paid with so much promptness that European capitalists formed a very high opinion both of our resources and our honor, and they took the stocks of States as freely as if they had been gold or silver."

As early as the fall of 1837, it was becoming evident that nature was operating for the relief of the country. This fact was recognized by John Y. Mason, of Virginia, in the House of Representatives, October 11, 1837: "Sir, the country is recovering fast from the violent and sudden convulsion into which it has been lately thrown. It cannot otherwise be, when we consider the immense resources of this vast continent, wielded, as they are, by a people whose industry and enterprise acknowledge no other limit than the very bonds of the earth." The revival of trade brought with it a return of confidence in the Democratic party, evidenced by the fall elections of 1838. In several States in which the party had either completely lost its hold or in which it had experienced long-continued minorities, the Democrats were successful and States which normally were Democratic showed large majorities. It was even predicted that the Whigs were on the brink of dissolution. The Democratic Review had this to say of the elections of 1838: "In New Jersey, the Whig majority of 1837 was changed into a Democratic majority; in Pennsylvania, the Democrats, after a severe contest, carried off the victory from the ruling party with about ten thousand votes; Maryland, which had a Federalist governor from time immemorial,' elected a man who had distinguished himself in the State legislature as an advocate of the independent treasuryship; Delaware, which had been hitherto decidedly Federalist, sent a Democrat to the House of Representatives; in South Carolina there is scarcely any opposition; in Georgia the parties

wrangle over local questions, but in general favor the independent treasuryship; in Illinois and Michigan the Democrats are making progress; in Missouri and Arkansas their majority is greatly increased; Ohio, where Van Buren was defeated in the presidential election, voted Democratic with a majority of about six thousand."

The campaign had been full of vituperation; fraud was charged on both sides. Especially was this the case in Pennsylvania. The winning of New York by the Whigs carried to the governorship William H. Seward, with a majority of over ten thousand. He was a man only thirty-seven years of age, and his success in wresting the Empire State from the Democrats marked a new era in national politics. The president's policy of a sub-treasury was rejected where its failure to receive support was most keenly felt. The Whigs had drawn to their support many conservative Democrats. But aside from financial matters there were other considerations that strengthened the new national party. Jackson's policy of caring for his followers and resenting inquiry into the administration of public office had encouraged, as it gave opportunity to, the perpetration of fraud. Revelations of corruption came to light to the disadvantage of Van Buren. It was found that "land officers, postmasters, public prosecutors, had been gambling and speculating with the moneys in their charge and keeping loose accounts, nor had their official bonds been well looked after." S. B. Swartwout, the collector of the port of New York, whose appointment to that important office had been regarded as a public scandal because of his notorious unfitness for the place, was found to be a defaulter to the extent of over a million dollars. Such disclosures had considerable effect on the elections, and added to this was the influence exerted by the various abolition societies.

Two subjects which came by inheritance from Jackson's administration and which were grievous burdens upon the shoulders of Van Buren during the period of the Twentysixth Congress, which convened December 2, 1839, were

the pending controversy with Great Britain with regard to the northeast boundary and the Texan question. During 1837, the situation upon the Canadian border was becoming critical. Maine, throughout its whole history the buffer territory of the Union, had passed forbearance in the controversy which subjected her to constant indignities at the hands of British subjects. The condition was becoming ominous, and the disaffection among a portion of the Canadian inhabitants developed an insurrection in November, 1837, which was speedily suppressed. In 1838, disturbances in Upper Canada were frequent, and American citizens across the border, hopeful of having Canada annexed to the United States, sought to foment the spirit of civil strife. Such was the situation when on November 21, 1838, President Van Buren issued a proclamation warning American citizens to observe the strictest neutrality. The defeat of a body of insurgents near Ogdensburg, New York, followed shortly upon the president's proclamation, but the danger zone was next transferred to territory claimed by Maine. A band of lawless men from the British provinces invaded this territory and cut a considerable quantity of timber. Empowered by the legislature to check the encroachment, the Governor of Maine despatched an agent to the scene, who was made prisoner by the trespassers and carried to Frederickton. An acrimonious correspondence between the authorities of Maine and New Brunswick ensued in which both sides enlarged upon their claims. On March 3, 1839, Congress authorized the president to take such action as he considered the situation demanded, whereupon Van Buren despatched General Winfield Scott to the scene of disorder. General Scott effected an agreement with General Harvey, the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, by which the disputed territory should remain in its former occupancy for the time being. This arrangement, which was satisfactory to Governor Fairfield, of Maine, relieved the situation and brought the question wholly into the hands of the Federal government and Great Britain. Turbulent spirits, however,

could not be entirely quelled by a pacific understanding between the governments, so that border disorders with unimportant bearing continued. From 1838 to 1840 negotiations with regard to the disputed territory were carried on with the result that the agitation for the annexation of the British provinces was allayed and a state of good feeling made to supersede the animosities.

Another subject continued to harass the administration and give anxiety to the nation. This was the war with the Seminoles of Florida, which was a development of the relations of the country with the Florida Indians during a series of years. It was the ineffectual protest on the part of the red men to the policy of the government to remove them to distant reservations. The war, which began, under Osceola, in 1835, continued for seven years, and was savage and expensive, costing above twenty millions of dollars. The history of Seminole relations can be briefly sketched. The treaty for the transfer of the Indians to the distant West was signed in 1832, but its operation was frustrated until 1834; then at the earnest solicitation of the chiefs it was postponed until 1836, when it was solemnly renewed, only to be broken by the Indians, who at this time instituted a widespread massacre. This was the war which was bequeathed by Jackson to Van Buren. Van Buren sent General T. S. Jesup to Florida. He conquered the Seminoles and dispersed them in small bands into the impenetrable swamps. Not alone the cost of the war with the Indians, but criticism based on sentimental reasons was hurled at the president, as there was throughout the North a prevalent sentiment for the red man. Nevertheless, Van Buren pursued his policy; but the prolonged struggle was only to end with the complete subjugation of the Seminoles.

In his message to the Twenty-sixth Congress in December, 1839, President Van Buren again advanced his independent treasury plan. The approaching national campaign made it important for the administration to seek to obtain the favorable verdict of Congress upon this measure.

In