The Federalist Frontier: Settler Politics in the Old Northwest, 1783– 1840 by Kristopher Maulden (review)

In The Federalist Frontier, Kristopher Maulden examines the legacy of Federalism in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, arguing that Federalist ideals and influence long outlasted the party’s ability to compete successfully for office. He draws a unifying thread between the Federalists, “energetic” Republicans, National Republicans, and Western Whigs who dominated state politics in the Old Northwest. He does so by tracing a handful of key ideals that these politicians shared: a desire for government intervention that would promote and protect education, law and order, and business. The book culminates with a description of Abraham Lincoln in the year 1840, showing how his politics at that time fit neatly into this long-standing “Federalist” tradition.

Government officials took time to establish Federalist policy in the West in the years after the American Revolutionary War. Maulden details the problems in the Ohio Valley during the 1780s: The government had a nominal right to the region, but could not control either the Indians or squatters who occupied it. By the 1790s, Federalists focused on increasing national power there, first by using the army and a series of aggressive treaty negotiations to extinguish Indian titles to the land, then by establishing federal policies for land distribution, which would ultimately result in the population increases needed for the establishment of states. They did so over the protests of Republicans who objected to high taxes to pay for perpetual wars. While this discussion is thorough, Maulden could have done more to address the threat of breakaway movements, which would have helped to contextualize the national government’s urgency regarding the West.

Some of Maulden’s best writing links quintessential Federalist attitudes with their approach to the West. Because they held central authority, rationality, and commercial development in high regard, the rectangular survey was therefore a key component to establishing legal titles and stability for frontier families. The rectangular survey necessitated large sales of hundreds of acres at a time, but Federalists had few qualms about frontier speculation. Wanting a hierarchical, prosperous society run by gentlemen, they detested squatters and found gentlemanly land speculators who promised to develop their communities attractive. In addition, Federalists wanted to set aside tax money for schools that would promote an orderly citizenry that would respect law and religion. Republicans instead focused on winning electoral strategies, emphasizing expanding suffrage for white men and attempting to limit the possibilities for land speculation in favor of small purchases for bona fide settlers. In contrast, haughty Federalist opposition to early Ohio state-hood did the party few favors with voters. Federalists followed this up with other losing political positions, such as opposition to the Louisiana Purchase.

While some Federalist politicians continued to win occasional elections in Ohio in the early nineteenth century, voters abandoned the party by the time that Indiana and Illinois became states in the last half of the 1810s. In Maulden’s words, “Conventional wisdom presents this period of Jeffersonian Republican triumph as a marked retreat from Federalist leadership and ideals” (89). Instead, Maulden asserts that “energetic” Republicans continued to embrace key Federalist policies, including rapid westward expansion and taking a hard line against Indians. At the same time, these Republicans tried to limit the tax burden while making the government more responsive to settlers through institutions like publicly funded schools and central state banks: “As a result, energetic Republicans in Indiana and Illinois enlarged, not shrank, the American state” (90). This stands in contrast to the classic Jeffersonian Republican embrace of minimally intrusive government. Maulden’s narrative of the early politics of Indiana and Illinois is thus contrarian: Republicans like William Henry Harrison enthusiastically advanced frontier policies established by Federalists.

Why did Federalist policies do well in the Old Northwest while the Federalist Party did not? Maulden attributes this to the “grand dissonance of American political thought, in which Americans embrace government power...