Customer Reviews

The Presidencies of James A. Garfield and Chester A. Arthur (American Presidency Series)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Since he was assassinated very early in his term, it is inappropriate to analyze the Garfield presidency. It would be reduced to statements of his intentions when he took office and speculations regarding how he would have handled events. Although Doenecke spends some time in examining Garfield's personal philosophy, to his credit, it is minimal. He concentrates on one of the greatest problems facing presidents at that time, the federal patronage, which was one of the few things that Garfield managed to do before he was gunned down.
In the era before civil service reform, the change of administration meant that many federal jobs needed to be filled. At the time, they were considered political spoils, to be awarded to individuals who had served the new president in the past or who were expected to serve him in the future. While all presidents used it as a rewards system, they also were frustrated in the number of applicants, and the time it took to deal with them. Therefore, the sections on what Garfield did as president largely deal with his handling of the patronage issues.
While Chester A. Arthur was a compromise candidate for vice president and automatically suspect as presidential material, his presidency suffered from yet another serious problem. Unlike the earlier presidents who died in office, Garfield lingered for some time after he was shot. Eighty days elapsed between the time Garfield was wounded and his death. Furthermore, at times it appeared that he would recover. Therefore, there was over two months of leadership limbo, plenty of time for the government to drift. During this time, Arthur's hands were tied, as there was no precedent concerning an incapacitated president.
There are two things about this book that are striking, although they are related. The first is how little coverage there is of domestic affairs, especially in the area of legislation. The years of the Arthur presidency were a time of little major legislative action, the only significant accomplishment were the initial steps of civil service reform. There is mention of the general economic conditions and the continued expansion of the industrial revolution, but nothing with significant depth.
The second point is the amount of coverage of U. S. involvement in world affairs. With a military that could have been easily defeated by that of nearly all European nations, there could be no muscle flexing. However, the growth of international commerce, the European imperial quest for colonies and the fact that the U. S. now covered both coasts meant that U. S. merchants now traveled the world in search of commercial and economic ties. For reasons that I don't understand, the 1890's are generally considered to be the point where the United States shed the isolationist mindset and began to take an interest in the rest of the world. Doenecke does an excellent job in describing how involved the U. S. was becoming a decade earlier. There is coverage of U. S. involvement in events in Korea, Hawaii, Madagascar, the Congo, South America and Central America. We see the beginnings of a country that is starting to understand that it can no longer restrict itself to what takes place in North America north of the Rio Grande River.
There is also extensive coverage of how incredibly weak the U. S. navy was in the years immediately after the Civil war. In order to blockade the south and starve it of resources, the Union built up what was then the most powerful navy in the world. However, after the war was over, it was so weak that even one of the medium size capital ships of the British navy was more powerful than all U. S. ships combined. Although it started slowly and there was a lot of partisan wrangling, one can see the initial glimmerings of a great power on the ascent.
While I commend Doenecke for his extensive coverage of U. S. involvement in the world, I believe that he should have spent more time in examining the events inside the U. S. I readily concede that President Arthur did little in the way of legislation, however there were many other things happening in the country during his administration. Presidents affect those events, even if only by their inaction, so I would have preferred more detailed explanations of some of those changes.

I'm not sure if it was the author or the two presidents lives, but this book was simply not as good as the other presidental books in this series. In all fairness to the author, these were not that interesting of presidents and according to the book, there weren't any tremendous U.S. events that occurred either. So in summary, it's a very brief account of two unremarkable presidents. A decent summary but seems to leave too many facts unknown.