The Historian's Perspective
First Anniversary Federal Theatre Production and World Premiere of "Rachel's Man," a Dramatization of the Life of Andrew Jackson, America's Most Colorful Soldier-Statesman. WPA Poster, 1937. (Courtesy of the Library of Congress, LC-USZC2-5537)
Female Trouble: Andrew Jackson vs. the Ladies of Washington
by Catherine Allgor
Andrew Jackson was mad. It was February 1829, a wintry day in Washington,
D.C., and President-elect Jackson was in a fury about the public’s
reaction to his cabinet announcements. To be fair, Jackson was already
angry when he arrived in the capital a month before. The target for his
anger: the ladies of Washington City.
The ladies that so infuriated Andrew Jackson were the white elite and
middle-class women of the city, members of local families and female kin
of government officials. By necessity, government officials were transient,
coming to the capital only part of the year and perhaps only for a term
or so. Indeed, Jackson's own daughter-in-law and official hostess, Emily
Donelson, was a newcomer. But the wives of prominent men with long careers
such as Floride Calhoun, wife of Senator and Vice President-elect John
C. Calhoun, were capital fixtures. Local families in Washington were year-round
and often of long standing. Margaret Bayard Smith, writer and journalist,
had come to the new city during its first official year as the capital.
Arriving in 1801, she had lived there for almost thirty years with her
husband, Samuel Harrison Smith, who began the
National Intelligencer
newspaper.
Ruling class women have played an important part in every city's formation,
but Washington women enjoyed particular powers and freedoms. The founders
deliberately designed the new federal government with as little bureaucracy
as possible, in direct contrast to the monarchy they had fought against.
They did not know that the republic they were building would turn into
a powerful nation-state that would require a strong federal government.
Within this structure, the founders' wives and daughters borrowed from
older, courtly styles of politicking, creating a sphere parallel to their
men folk’s official one. The social world, ruled by women, was an
early form of political machine that dispensed patronage, made political
deals, and entertained a good deal of legislative business. In the soft
candlelight of an influential lady's parlor, male legislators felt they
could make alliances and deals that would not stand the glare of the official
spotlight. In addition, in the decades before the United States became
a two-party democracy, the incipient ruling class learned to work together—not
in Congress, where men beat each other with canes and shouted, but at
social events, which required all to be on their best behavior.
The ladies of Washington not only hosted the political game, they played
it. In their informal way, they performed functions that would become
part of the official governmental structure in the years to come. Their
"party machine" presaged the institutionalized party machines
that would function in the political landscape of the 1830s. These women
also acted as a kind of civil service. Fearing charges of corruption,
male officials were reluctant to be seen giving out government jobs, while
their wives and female relations sponsored candidates freely. Any man
who wanted a government post knew the best route lay in petitioning a
powerful woman.
The ladies of Washington were not feminists or radicals and would have
been horrified if anyone had accused them of playing politics. From their
point of view, they were eminently respectable, moral women taking care
of their family and friends. If this meant giving a job to a deserving
young man, well, it was all part of their role. But they were powerful
and enjoyed playing politics and, on occasion, expressing political opinions.
And during the presidential election of 1828, they expressed themselves
on the topic of candidate Andrew Jackson's wife, Rachel Donelson Robards
Jackson.
During the campaign, the supporters of Jackson's opponent, President John
Quincy Adams, painted Andrew Jackson as a violent, backcountry savage.
The infamous "Coffin Handbill" displayed a line of coffins representing
the men Jackson had killed in duels or executed as a military commander.
Pro-Adams men also used the circumstances of Jackson’s marriage
to Rachel Donelson Robards to depict their rival as a lustful, angry man
who would take whatever he wanted—in this case, a woman from her
husband.
The truth was that when Rachel Donelson Robards and Andrew Jackson met
on the frontier, she was married to Lewis Robards, a cruel man who had
deserted her. When Rachel got word that Lewis Robards had divorced her,
she married Andrew in 1791. When the couple discovered a few years later
that the divorce had not been finalized, they remarried legally. By the
time of the election, the Jacksons had lived happily together for decades,
and Rachel Jackson was the soul of respectability.
But opposition newspapers seized upon the story, painting Rachel Jackson
as a loose woman, and the Jackson marriage as bigamous. In the end, the
scandal did little to influence male voters. Legally improvised marriages
were all too common on the frontier. However, Rachel Jackson suffered
more bad press: Washingtonians who did not credit the more sensational
stories still enjoyed mocking her country ways, and joked about her smoking
her pipe in the White House. Andrew Jackson kept most of this from his
wife, who was already nervous about being First Lady. Sadly, a few days
before the victorious Jacksons were to leave for Washington, Rachel heard
these stories, collapsed, and shortly died, probably of a heart attack.
As it became known that slanders and satire had brought on Rachel Jackson's
death, Washingtonians reacted with shock, sorrow, and unease. As a "man
of the people," Andrew Jackson had already expressed his scorn for
capital society and "politics as usual." He threatened to clean
house by sweeping aside long-term office holders. No doubt some ladies
were ashamed that they had made fun of this countrywoman, but they and
others also feared the repercussions. Margaret Bayard Smith echoed the
thoughts of many when she mourned the loss of Rachel Jackson as "a
wife who, it is said, could control the violence of his tempers."
Though grief can soften a man, Bayard Smith warned it could also "sour"
him, and if it did so in this case, "the public councils and affairs
will have reason to deplore this awful and sudden event."
So Andrew Jackson's anger was already at the boiling point on that cold
February day in 1829, as he fumed about public reaction to his cabinet
choice. All had hoped for a strong cabinet of able men, who, in the absence
of Jackson’s wife, could curb the president's impulses and temper.
What they got was what the press called scornfully "a millennium
of minnows"—lesser men who could not control their leader.
The society women of Washington focused on one particular appointment:
Andrew Jackson’s friend John Eaton, chosen as secretary of war.
In their view, John Eaton wasn't the problem: his wife was. A beautiful
widow, Margaret O'Neale Timberlake Eaton was a local boardinghouse keeper's
daughter with a dubious sexual reputation. Among other accusations, she
was said to have started an affair with John Eaton before her first husband
died. Washington’s elite would not only be forced to interact with
her, but since President Jackson and Secretary of State Martin Van Buren
both were widowers, and John Eaton was a Jackson favorite, Margaret Eaton
would serve as the
de facto First Lady. The ladies were scandalized
by this sudden ascension to the pinnacle of Washington society.
There was a deeper reason for their reaction, aside from the local knowledge
of the new Mrs. Eaton. Andrew Jackson rose to power as the first Democratic
president. To many, "democracy" meant "rule by the mob,"
and there was doubt about the value of the "common man." The
elevation of "Peggy" (her detractors scornfully called her by
this coarse nickname for "Margaret") showed Jackson’s
lack of judgment, as she was deemed "common" in both senses—ordinary
and vulgar.
The day cabinet posts were announced, a delegation of Washington insiders
paid a call on the president-elect to warn him that by "thrusting"
Margaret Eaton on the ladies of Washington, by forcing them to interact
with her at dinners and parties, he would have trouble. Jackson reacted
ferociously: "Do you suppose that I have been sent by the people
to consult the ladies of Washington as to the proper persons to compose
my Cabinet?" Old Hickory saw the attacks on Margaret on par with
the attacks on his beloved Rachel. Margaret Eaton quoted Jackson: "I
tell you, Margaret, I had rather have live vermin on my back than the
tongue of one of these Washington women on my reputation." Little
did he know that by not listening to this particular segment of "We
the People," he came close to dooming his administration.
Jackson's reaction incited what became known as the “Peggy Eaton
Affair," or the "Petticoat War," and the first shot was
fired during the Inaugural Ball. Washingtonians arrived at the Ball already
jittery. The Inauguration ceremony had gone well enough, but the reception
had turned into a riot with revelers breaking glassware and furniture.
Margaret Bayard Smith wryly remarked, "It was the People's day and
the people's President and the People would rule." The "Era
of the Common Man" had not begun auspiciously.
At the Ball, the ladies of the administration, led by Floride Calhoun,
cut Margaret Eaton dead, refusing to be introduced or to speak with her.
From that night on, the "Eaton Malaria" spread. Calhoun and
her allies (including the cabinet wives) persuaded even the president's
own daughter-in-law and hostess, Emily Donelson, to join with them against
Margaret. By their use of invitations and their behaviors at social events
the ladies of Washington pressured everyone to choose sides. Soon parties
and balls became mini-demonstrations of whether one was a "Jackson
man" or not. Social events had always been somewhat partisan; now
they became "life or death" declarations, stifling bi-partisan
activity.
The men folk tried to keep up, jockeying for position, looking for any
political hay to be made. Martin Van Buren, a widower, took the Eatons'
side and positioned himself to be Andrew Jackson's successor. (He would
win the Election of 1836.) Vice President-elect John C. Calhoun had assumed
he would be the president after Jackson, but his wife's role in the "Malaria"
pushed him out, contributing to Calhoun's sense of alienation from the
Union and his pro-secession stance.
At first it seemed that Jackson's stubbornness would win, as he gave parties
and dinners with Margaret Eaton on his arm. Yet when Emily Donelson continued
to side with the more experienced political women, Jackson sent her home,
a frustrating signal to the president that he could not exert authority
even in his own family. Cabinet meeting after meeting was held, either
to refute the slippery charges of sexual impropriety (at one point Jackson
thundered, "She is as chaste as a virgin!") or to allow the
president to simply "roar" at his cabinet, insisting that the
cabinet families visit and socialize with Margaret Eaton.
By the spring of 1831, as the Affair dragged on, Washington society was
afraid to move for fear of offending someone important. Deadlocked, the
parlors of the city closed. With no unofficial meeting place, political
business stalled from the cabinet on down. The mighty Andrew Jackson,
who fought like a lion in battle, could not prevail against a battalion
of Washington ladies.
Finally, Jackson admitted defeat. Martin Van Buren and John Eaton withdrew
from their positions in order to break the stalemate. When other cabinet
members with "anti-Peggy" wives refused to follow suit, Jackson
fired them. The story of the "Eaton Affair," which had remained
largely confined to Washington circles, suddenly became a national story.
Never before had a president fired his whole cabinet. Americans across
the United States, fearful that such a move forecasted a coup d'état
or worse, clamored to know the reason why. The disgruntled former cabinet
members, safe in their home districts, were only too happy to oblige with
a tale of executive tyranny. The nation's newspapers exploded when they
discovered a woman at the center of this unprecedented housecleaning.
They dubbed Margaret Eaton "the Doom of the Republic," casting
her as the sign of the federal government’s end. When the Eatons
returned to Tennessee, and later traveled to Spain in a delegation from
the United States, it seemed the ladies of Washington had won.
But in the end, everyone lost. Andrew Jackson began his political career
in the rough-and-tumble, all-male world of the frontier. He was unaware
of the role of women in politics and nation-building. Ironically, Jackson,
who would become famous for extending and furthering democracy, could
not recognize their work as "political." For their parts, the
elite women of Washington overstepped their influence. To refuse a person
of dubious reputation was a privilege wielded by upper class societies
in all cities. Yet Washington City was different. By the 1820s, it was
clear that Washington was built by, on, and for national politics, and
everything in the city—including its social life—needed to
bow to that reality. Nothing showed this more clearly than Eaton Affair.
As the political culture embraced a two-party system in the 1830s and
1840s, the ladies of Washington continued to exert their political power—but
they had learned that, in the capital, society was always the handmaiden
to politics.
Catherine Allgor's book, Parlor Politics: In Which
the Ladies of Washington City Help Build a City and a Government
,
published by the University of Virginia Press, won the prize for the best
first book by the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic.
Her political biography, A Perfect Union: Dolley Madison and the
Creation of The American Nation
(Henry Holt, 2006), was a finalist
for the George Washington Book Prize. On March 1, 2010, PBS will debut
Dolley Madison
, for which she served as an advisor.
HOME