The steel structure allowed walls to be hung to the frame like floors. This allowed architects to build structures higher and higher. Granville Stuart led the deadliest vigilante movement in U.
The first part can be found here. The second part can be found here. The third part can be found here. The fourth part can be found here. Andrew Jackson and the "Spoils System" The "spoils system," a derogatory term for rotation in administrative office,  was brought to the United States by President Andrew Jackson.
Jackson, an ardent Jeffersonian and Old Republican, was, like other Jacksonian leaders, dedicated to a new Democratic Party that would restore original Jeffersonian Republican principles of laissez-faire and ultra-minimal government.
Jackson followed Jefferson in managing, for the second and presumably the last time in American history, to repay the national debt; and he and his dedicated successors, Van Buren and Polk, roughly succeeded in establishing hard money and separating the federal government from the banking system, as well as eliminating the protective tariff.
Jackson, a wealthy cotton planter and merchant in Nashville, had been energized by corruption in the Monroe administration and by the bank credit collapse in the Panic of One of the aspects of government that desperately needed reform, according to Jackson, was the life-tenured bureaucracy.
The spoils system had been operating in New York and in Pennsylvania for a number of years, and had been formally incorporated into the Tenure of Office Act. But now Jackson, head of a new incoming party hungry for office, became the first president to sound the trumpet call, and provide an ideological justification for rotation in office.
He wanted to change the civil service, as well as to shrink it. In his First Annual Message, Jackson denounced the entrenched bureaucracy: There are, perhaps, few men who can for any great length of time enjoy office and power without being more or less under the influence of feelings unfavorable to the faithful discharge of their public duties … [T]hey are apt to acquire a habit of looking with indifference upon the public interests and of tolerating conduct from which an unpracticed man would revolt.
Office is considered a species of property, and government rather as a means of promoting individual interests than as an instrument created solely for the service of the people. As a result, Jackson went on, government is diverted from "its legitimate end" and made into "an engine for the support of the few at the expense of the many.
Offices were not established to give support to particular men at the public expense. Jackson went on to hone in on the absurd and despotic theory that government officials acquire a property right in the office: No individual wrong is, therefore, done by removal [from office], since neither appointment to nor continuance in office is a matter of right … The proposed limitation [four years] would destroy the idea of property now so generally connected with official station, and although individual distress may be sometimes produced, it would, by promoting that rotation which constitutes a leading principle in the republican creed, give healthful action to the system.
Daniel Webster, a Federalist turned Whig, thundered that the government agencies, such as the armed forces, the Post Office, the Land Office, or the Customs-house, are "institutions of the country, established for the good of the people," and that therefore it threatened free institutions for these offices to be spoken of as but "the spoils of victory.
But fortunately, the Supreme Court, in Ex parte Hennenits first case on the subject, ruled unequivocally that no government official, even in the federal judiciary below the Supreme Court, had a property right in his office, and that the President or any other statutory authority had the right to dismiss him at will.
Including all the lesser federal employees, however, the removal rate was less than twenty percent. In his last two years in office, he removed postmasters, amounting to about three percent of 12, to tighten the officialdom a bit for the coming election campaign.
The true test of whether the spoils system would stay was what the Whigs would do when they ousted the Democrats from the Presidency in Would they stand by their allegedly fiercely held principles against rotation in office?
Or would they succumb to the lure of kicking out the Democrats and replacing them by good Whigs? Fortunately, they abandoned their principles and succumbed to temptation, the Harrison and Tyler Administrations ousting fully fifty percent of the presidential class officials.
Polk returned for the Democrats inhe ousted thirty-seven percent of the presidential class employees, and also managed to appoint, during his four years, 13, out of the existing 16, postmasters, even though only 1, were removed from office while 10, filled vacancies caused by resignations.
When Zachary Taylor came in for the second Whig administration, he settled the principle of rotation in office, ousting fifty-eight percent of the presidential class officeholders. Indeed, Taylor told his Secretary of the Treasury that "rotation in office, provided good men are appointed, is sound republican doctrine.
Every American child or immigrant was socialized into a political party and its ideology, and as a result each American was fiercely loyal to his own party.
In contrast to the current political scene, where parties have no particular ideology and command no particular loyalty, there were very few floating, independent voters. By being carriers and instruments of a party ideology, the political parties in nineteenth century America were the vitally important means by which ideology could dominate the narrow clash of special interest groups and seekers after government subsidies and privilege.
The disappearance of ideological parties, starting inbrought about the weak and fuzzy party politics we are familiar with today. It is clear that clashing ideological parties would be more willing to throw the rascals out, since they really believed that their opponents were rascals.
Both common party ideologies and the spoils system kept the political party system healthy and flourishing. What everyone now laments as the anemia and near-death of party organization and party loyalty was brought about by the twin blows of the demise of the spoils system and the disappearance of a fervently held party ideology.
Writing later, in the s, historian Charles R. Lingley well expressed the importance of the spoils system and its linkage with ideology: In the field of actual politics, parties are a necessity and organization is essential.Study Guide Series on Peace and Conflict 5 Governance, Corruption, and Conflict United Nations, put the cost of corruption succinctly in his Foreword to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption.
78 See Peter W. Schroth, Corruption and Accountability of the Civil Service in the United States, 54 Am. J. Comp. L. , – 63 () (discussing enactment of the Pendleton Act and its aftermath). President Arthur signed the Pendleton Act of January 16, , and appointed the last CSC chairman, Dorman Eaton, to be the head of the new three-man Civil Service Commission.
Civil-service reform was now part of the statutes of the United States. Corruption was a serious problem in Singapore during the British colonial period for two reasons: the British colonial government lacked the political will to curb corruption and this weakness was reflected in the adoption of ineffective anti-corruption measures.
T F By reducing politicians’ use of patronage, the new civil-service system inadvertently made them more dependent on big campaign contributors. __Liberal Republican party__ Short-lived third party of that attempted to curb Grant administration corruption. introduced by the Pendleton Act .
As journalists and activist groups are coming under mounting pressure from governments around the world (see here), evidence sheds new light on the vital importance of civil society organisations (CSOs) and independent media in anti-corruption efforts.