Political career of John C. Breckinridge is a
featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the
Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Sorry to have been so slow in my review. Looks quite good, generally, a few things:
General comment: Consider having the chronological run-through of political career before the discussion of views. That way people are more familiar with the events you speak of in there. Just a suggestion.
Lede
"almost three decades". Checking the article, it seems to be 23 years, 1828 to 1851. Perhaps "almost a quarter century"? And were there really Democrats before that?
"As a reward for supporting internal improvements," You use the "i i" phrase in the last sentence, so I would suggest changing the last two words to "these projects".
Out of curiosity, were these resolutions on the Compromise of 1850 resolutions instructing Kentucky's senators how to vote? I've got an article planned on the legislative election of senators, and resolutions of instruction are all part of that. Just wondering for future reference.
Although I don't have the Heck book in front of me right now, if I remember the chronology correctly, the Compromise of 1850 was more like a list of ideas that formed the basis for a potential compromise than an actual piece of legislation at the time the resolutions were passed, hence the "fair and equitable basis" language. I think they were just kind of saying, "Yeah, we could get behind a plan that looks kinda like that."
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"the problem was money". Although this article merely covers the political career, a few timely words on how Breckinridge made a living would be a good idea.
" Fillmore held unclear views on slavery" They were perhaps clear to Fillmore! Perhaps something along the lines that Fillmore had not fully disclosed his views on slavery.
"After his maiden speech, Breckinridge took a more active role in the House." More active than what? He spoke on the day he was sworn in!
Oops! I was off by a year on the date of his speech. Davis goes into some detail about how newly-elected reps tried to get the floor to say pretty much anything to show that they were doing their jobs (and hence worthy of re-election), contrasting this with Breckinridge, who was apparently admired by his more senior colleagues for his restraint.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
" Andrew Johnson's Homestead Act," I'd preface it with a "Tennessee Representative" or similar, and call it the Homestead Bill, as it was not enacted until 11 years later, using a pipe.
Introductory paragraph. I'm a bit confused by the sequence of events. Washington Territory was not organized until March 2, 1853. Wouldn't waiting to decline the governorship leave very little time for re-election? You need to be clearer about the month and year that these elections took place in (including for the first term). I'm gathering that like Tennessee, they sometimes didn't bother to have the election until the term started, after all, Congress wasn't going to convene until December. But that doesn't explain his maiden speech. Also … Governor of Washington Territory .. in 1853 (I've just read one of
Ezra Meeker's memoirs) when there was nothing there … that seems like a reward you'd rather not have because it would sideline you from national politics. It also makes me wonder why he would seek it at all.
Well, hopefully, the maiden speech issue has been cleared up. The dates of the 1851 election were August 3-4, 1851; I would assume the 1853 elections were in a similar time frame. I don't have the exact date of the election that took Crittenden out of the running as a competitor – only the year – but he had to be elected by the General Assembly, which convenes January through March or so, unless he was elected in a special session. As for Governor of Washington Territory, I know that by the end of Breckinridge's second House term, his wife was pushing him to leave national politics anyway, so that sentiment might have already been present in 1853. Also, financial troubles were probably a factor again. Being one of the first lawyers in that area could have made for a lucrative practice a few years down the road. That's guesswork on my part, though.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"and he decided to decline it " The "and" should not be there.
Given that you are detailing the other side's shenanigans towards Breckinridge in his second congressional election, if he also indulged in such things then, and if the source says so, you should mention it. As one of Hanna's biographers put it, this was the way the game was played on both sides.
It's very ambiguous. Davis says that Breckinridge's friends raised money "to counteract the damage the Whigs were doing". While he goes as far as to give the amounts Letcher supporters were paying people to not vote or to vote for Letcher, this one statement is all that is said about how Breckinridge used the few thousand dollars he raised. If the estimates of $30,000 to $100,000 raised by the Whigs are accurate, it is difficult to believe the $4,000 to $5,000 raised by Breckinridge could effectively combat widespread vote buying, but who knows?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Democracy". Suggest a footnote or parenthetical indicating that he was talking about the party. That may be lost on a 21st century reader
"Southerners thwarted his previous attempts" Perhaps "Southerners had thwarted his previous attempts to accomplish this", perhaps tossing in the fact that the territories might become free states, helping to outvote the South. Also, you sort of dance around the point that the K-N act was passed, but you never quite close the deal on it. You should also explain how it was the South did not block the K-N act, as you've mentioned that they thwarted Douglas's previous attempts.
"Had it taken place, Breckinridge could have been removed from the House; the 1850 Kentucky Constitution " this was long before Powell v. McCormick, of course, but would a clause in a state constitution have really removed him from office? I can see state officials might have kept him off the ballot in future elections.
It's impossible to say for sure, of course, but I think it's possible. If he became ineligible for the office by participating in a duel, the seat could have been declared vacant and a new election ordered by the General Assembly. As evidenced by the subsequent gerrymandering of the district, the Whigs had both the votes and the motivation to take such an action.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"paid only debts those related to powers" Issue here.
"The ascension of the Know Nothing Party further hindered Breckinridge's re-election chances." A few words as to why would be good. I'd also toss a "nativist" or "anti-immigrant" in front of the party name.
"the salary was insufficient" If I'm correct that the minister was expected to pay for many of his own expenses out of the salary, that might be worth a mention.
"presidential elector " When? Surely not in 1856? And if before then, why would that carry particular weight of itself?
Davis says that, at the state Democratic convention in Louisville in 1856, Powell supporters had the pleasure of "seeing Breckinridge appointed a state elector and delegate to Cincinnati". Not sure how else to read it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Tennessee's Andrew Johnson" "Tennessee Governor Andrew Johnson". I really don't see the need to link the name of states, generally, except for in this article probably Kentucky and possibly Iowa.
"a fourth defeated Johnson's Homestead Act." Homestead Bill, I suggest. I mention this incident in Johnson's article. Also, does the VP ever actively debate? Especially the 19th century vice president? I'm a bit taken aback by the suggestion that but for his desire to be seen as an impartial moderator, he'd have been fighting in the trenches of Senate debate. I'm not even sure he was allowed to rule on questions raised to the chair, because I know Hobart changed that.
I didn't really mean to imply that a desire to be impartial motivated his non-interference. Certainly, the rules of debate dictated that, something that clearly frustrated Breckinridge. Davis writes that he had much more influence as a legislator under Pierce than as vice-president under Buchanan. But I also wanted to note that, despite his strong feelings on the issues of the day, he tried – and succeeded in the opinion of most – to be impartial in his duties.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
" Kansas's approval" perhaps "the voters of Kansas Territory's approval"
"they adjourned" refers to convention, so should be "it". I'd make it clearer that Guthrie was also a Kentuckian, perhaps by adding "as
favorite son" after his first mention.
"On June 25, Jefferson Davis" His famous office so blinds people to the rest of his political career that I think you have to throw a "Mississippi Senator" in there.
" rather than a compromise Democrat" reads strangely, you might want to frame it if the source supports about an unwillingness to vote for a slavery supporter, or possibly a Southerner.
"Reminding the audience that Douglas wanted the Supreme Court to decide the issue of slavery in the territories, he pointed out that Douglas then denounced the Dred Scott ruling and laid out a means for territorial legislatures to circumvent it.Reminding the audience that Douglas wanted the Supreme Court to decide the issue of slavery in the territories, he pointed out that Douglas then denounced the Dred Scott ruling and laid out a means for territorial legislatures to circumvent it." I'm not sure I see the relevance of this to B's candidacy.
I read it to be a charge of "flip flopping" by Douglas, an accusation that seems to have carried political weight since the beginning of American political history.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Check over your capitalization of "Southern" to ensure it is as you would have it (there's at least one, in another section, "pro-Southern", which looks a bit odd to me. Also, "southern states" is inconsistently capitalized.)
I'm always torn between the idea of "south" and "southern" as a regional designation or a simple geographic descriptor. I think I've at least got it consistent now.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Governor Magoffin refused to endorse the resolution, preventing its enforcement." Short of with a gun, it was difficult to see how they would enforce it anyway, which was the problem with resolutions of instruction and the like.
Sorry for the delay. Since I got my new computer, I've been spending an inordinate amount of time playing
Civilization V instead of doing Wikipedia. Have responded to some comments above. Hope to get to the rest soon.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
IMages:
File:John C. Breckinridge statue Lexington KY.jpg I'm unclear on the status of photographs of statues in the US - do we need to know the copyright status of the statue as well as the actual photograph?
run-in links "he was one of three candidates opposing Republican Abraham Lincoln." perhaps try "he was one of three candidates opposing Abraham Lincoln, a Republican."
I think "southern states" rather than "Southern States".
Actually, per the comments from Wehwalt, I think I tried to go with "Southern states", where "Southern" is capitalized because it refers to the South as a region. Changed.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"After the firing on Fort Sumter, he opposed allocating resources..." awkward, can we reword?
"he fled behind Confederate battle lines and joined" odd phrasing for modern writing - suggest "he fled to the south and joined..."
Really? I didn't really think it was all that odd. Plus, "fled south" isn't really accurate. He fled east, then back west, and ended up only a little south (relatively speaking) from where he started. Bowling Green is more west by southwest of Lexington.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"he encouraged Davis to effect a national surrender" very Victorian phrasing - suggest "he encouraged Davis to surrender"
I guess using "effect" as a verb is a little antiquated, but it's not accurate to say he encouraged Davis to surrender. He wanted the Confederacy to surrender, but Davis personally planned to flee for his life unless he got a guarantee of amnesty, I think. Davis was potentially facing capital punishment for treason.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"John Breckinridge believed the federal government..." which John Breckenridge?
I've tried to consistently use "John Breckinridge" for the elder (I've never seen a middle name or initial for him) and "John C. Breckinridge" for the younger.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"As a state representative, he introduced the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, denouncing the Alien and Sedition Acts and asserting that states could nullify them and other federal..." you've switched tenses here .. pick on and stick with it.
"he lost to Constitutional Unionist John Bell, who owned" ... link run on here .. suggest "he lost to the Constitutional Unionist candidate John Bell, who owned..."
"Bell and Illinois' Stephen Douglas exceeded"... run on again ... suggest just dropping "Illinois'"
Changed to "Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas". Since the details of the nominations and election are later in the article, it gives some sense of who the candidate was.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"was the most extreme to which the South would agree" most extreme what?
"Initially supportive of Zachary Taylor for the presidency, he endorsed the Democratic ticket of Lewis Cass and William O. Butler after Taylor became a Whig." can we have a few dates in here to help anchor things chronologically?
need a cite on "impairing [slavery protections] in any form" quotation
It belongs to one of the two footnotes at the end of that sentence, although without either source in front of me, I can't say which. Typically, I try to keep all cites at the end of a sentence. Does this require breaking that convention to keep the footnote adjacent to the quote?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Yeah, you do need it here because it's a reasonably long way away from the cite. Quotes need cites within a word or two of them ending, whether or not that's the end of the sentence. It's the one big thing about citations for GA -
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Davis wrote that his most important work during the session was bank reform." this jars with the previous sentence... can we get a bit better linkage/transition?
The unfortunate thing is, although Davis makes the assertion, he gives no context or details, so this seems to stick out no matter where I put it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
About the committees and his floor leadership? Not really, except his work on the Federal Relations Committee wrt the Compromise of 1850, but moving this up breaks the section's chronology.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)reply
linkage for any of these - (minus the river which is linked) "geologic survey, making the Kentucky River more navigable, chartering a turnpike, incorporating a steamboat company, and funding the Kentucky Lunatic Asylum"?
Are you looking for links to the specific survey, turnpike, steamboat company, and asylum? None of those articles exist, and the source isn't even specific about which turnpike or which steamboat company.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Actually, I was thinking the generic items - not all folks know what a turnpike is anymore... and I'd think the lunatic asylum would merit an article... (you could always try to convince Malleus to flesh it out...)
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Linked "turnpike" and learned that the Kentucky Lunatic Asylum eventually became known as
Eastern State Hospital, so I've linked that. Are asylums an interest of Malleus'? I'm only vaguely familiar with his work, although I generally have a favorable impression.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"The committee's Whig majority favored one calling the compromise a ..." one what?
"Despite this, after Boyd's election, he assigned Breckinridge.." it's slightly unclear who "he" is referring to here.
Really? The only alternative interpretation would be that Breckinridge assigned himself to a lightly-regarded committee, which doesn't make much sense.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Like Young America, Breckinridge favored westward expansion and free trade.." Did you mean "Like Young Americans, Breckinridge favored westward expansion and free trade"?
Well, I was really referring to the movement itself, which was known as "Young America". I'm not sure if "Young Americans" was used as a moniker for the movement's adherents or not.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
It really reads oddly as it is. I suggest figuring out if "Young American" would apply as it jars badly as written. The reader is expecting an adjectival bit and gets a noun.
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"..aspirant William Butler against charges by Florida's Edward Carrington Cabell, a Young American and distant cousin, that he secretly sympathized with the Free Soilers." tangled up here - that last "he secretly" phrase isn't quite clear who "he" means
Not sure what "but Breckinridge showed that Douglas endorsed the Democratic Review a month after it printed its first anti-Butler article" has to do with anything, I'm missing context, I suspect.
Richardson was trying to put distance between Douglas and Sanders' anti-Butler articles in the Democratic Review, but Breckinridge showed that Douglas actually endorsed the Democratic Review after its first article denouncing Butler.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"because the sculptor proposed depicting Washington in a toga." didn't this statue get funded anyway? Would be a great explanatory footnote ...
You know, I'm not actually sure. Davis – the only source I presently have in front of me – says he was opposed to "any more" sculptures depicting Washington in a toga, so apparently, there were several such sculptures, and without knowing the proposed sculptor, it would be difficult to say whether the specific one he opposed was actually completed.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"increasing a subsidy to Collins Line for carrying" I think it should be "increasing a subsidy to the Collins Line for carrying" to make it clear it's not a person.
"Finally, he showed Cornelius Vanderbilt's statement promising to build a fleet of mail ships at his expense and carry the mail for $4 million less than Collins" ... awkward - suggest "Finally, he mentioned Cornelius Vanderbilt's statement promising to build a fleet of mail ships at his expense and carry the mail for $4 million less than Collins."
If I read your comment correctly, I think the confusion comes from the fact that I hadn't explicitly mentioned that it was a written statement. I've rectified that.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Second term:
"to recruit Douglas to his cause" --- Breckenridges or Pierce's cause?
IF the quote is more than a word or so removed from the cite, yes. Quotes need cites ON them, not at the end of the sentence.
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Pierce told Breckinridge of his nomination to fill the vacancy just before the Senate's January" does this mean that Pierce nominated Breckenridge? Its unclear..
"and his enemy, Linn Boyd" ... but I thought Breckenridge had supported Boyd before?
Not really. He deferred to him in the Speaker's race, and after he got snubbed (twice) by Boyd on committee assignments, the sources say they became factional enemies, although any conflict between them other than electoral contests go unmentioned.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Really don't need to attribute "Heck wrote that the election was between Buchanan and Republican... " to Heck - it's a pretty common belief as I recall from my various US history classes.
I always try to cite observations like this in case there is competing scholarship on the subject. If you're sure there isn't on this point, I'll remove it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"fourth defeated Johnson's Homestead Bill" which Johnson? Do we have a link for the bill?
Both Johnson and the bill are first mentioned and linked in the fourth paragraph under "First term". The bill kept getting defeated and Johnson kept re-introducing it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"more commodious one" ... very Victorian phrasing, suggest rewording.
Again, no need to attribute to a specific historican "Harrison characterized the race as "Lincoln against Douglas in the north; Breckinridge against Bell in the south"." .. this is pretty common historical consensus as I understand it.
Can we get a better heading here? It implies that it covers his entire Senate career but that's not the case
Yes, really it does, unless you count his service as vice president as part of his Senate career. He was elected in December 1859, but his predecessor's term did not expire until 1861. His term as vice president expired the same day his term as a senator began – March 4, 1861. He served until either his resignation in his October 8 letter or his expulsion on December 2, whichever you regard as valid.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"reminded the solons that Congress had not approved" - solons??? huh?
Another old-style term that I see a lot in the sources. Keeps me from having to repeat "legislators" so often. Do you think it's too problematic to leave?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I doubt anyone but me would understand the reference quite honestly. You're falling into the same problem I have - you read so much of a particular type of source that you start adopting the phrasing of them... academic phrasing isn't always the best choice for a general readership encyclopedia. Reword it - no one is going to get the phrase (which traces, by the way, to the ancient Athenian lawgiver
Solon... very typical that a Victorian writer would use it but well out of common usage nowadays.)
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
why list all the offices held by the confederates, but omit the military title for Sherman?
Lack of confidence in my understanding of military rank. Often, I see "General" but then I understand that can be "brigadier general", "major general", "lieutenant general", or full-fledged "general". Didn't know off-hand which Sherman was, and the source didn't say, so I left it out. All that said, I now see that Sherman's is an FA, and it has the dates of his promotions given, so I can accurately determine that his rank at the time was "major general". Added.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Again a lack of rank for "forces under Andrew K. Campbell"...
Same issue. The article on Campbell has a "citation needed" tag on his promotion to lieutenant colonel. If correct, I suppose that would have been his rank at the time. I'll assume good faith and add that.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.
Ealdgyth -
Talk20:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I struck the items where I'm pretty sure I address the concern satisfactorily. I left some others pending your feedback. If they are to your satisfaction, go ahead and strike them if you want. A few will almost certainly merit some further discussion. Thanks for the quick and thorough review.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Struck some more and have a few replies on a few more. Suggest, as usual, getting someone else to copyedit for FAC as I'm only sorta good at it. I can pick apart the context with the best of them though!
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Political career of John C. Breckinridge. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
Political career of John C. Breckinridge is a
featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the
Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
please do so.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Sorry to have been so slow in my review. Looks quite good, generally, a few things:
General comment: Consider having the chronological run-through of political career before the discussion of views. That way people are more familiar with the events you speak of in there. Just a suggestion.
Lede
"almost three decades". Checking the article, it seems to be 23 years, 1828 to 1851. Perhaps "almost a quarter century"? And were there really Democrats before that?
"As a reward for supporting internal improvements," You use the "i i" phrase in the last sentence, so I would suggest changing the last two words to "these projects".
Out of curiosity, were these resolutions on the Compromise of 1850 resolutions instructing Kentucky's senators how to vote? I've got an article planned on the legislative election of senators, and resolutions of instruction are all part of that. Just wondering for future reference.
Although I don't have the Heck book in front of me right now, if I remember the chronology correctly, the Compromise of 1850 was more like a list of ideas that formed the basis for a potential compromise than an actual piece of legislation at the time the resolutions were passed, hence the "fair and equitable basis" language. I think they were just kind of saying, "Yeah, we could get behind a plan that looks kinda like that."
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"the problem was money". Although this article merely covers the political career, a few timely words on how Breckinridge made a living would be a good idea.
" Fillmore held unclear views on slavery" They were perhaps clear to Fillmore! Perhaps something along the lines that Fillmore had not fully disclosed his views on slavery.
"After his maiden speech, Breckinridge took a more active role in the House." More active than what? He spoke on the day he was sworn in!
Oops! I was off by a year on the date of his speech. Davis goes into some detail about how newly-elected reps tried to get the floor to say pretty much anything to show that they were doing their jobs (and hence worthy of re-election), contrasting this with Breckinridge, who was apparently admired by his more senior colleagues for his restraint.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
" Andrew Johnson's Homestead Act," I'd preface it with a "Tennessee Representative" or similar, and call it the Homestead Bill, as it was not enacted until 11 years later, using a pipe.
Introductory paragraph. I'm a bit confused by the sequence of events. Washington Territory was not organized until March 2, 1853. Wouldn't waiting to decline the governorship leave very little time for re-election? You need to be clearer about the month and year that these elections took place in (including for the first term). I'm gathering that like Tennessee, they sometimes didn't bother to have the election until the term started, after all, Congress wasn't going to convene until December. But that doesn't explain his maiden speech. Also … Governor of Washington Territory .. in 1853 (I've just read one of
Ezra Meeker's memoirs) when there was nothing there … that seems like a reward you'd rather not have because it would sideline you from national politics. It also makes me wonder why he would seek it at all.
Well, hopefully, the maiden speech issue has been cleared up. The dates of the 1851 election were August 3-4, 1851; I would assume the 1853 elections were in a similar time frame. I don't have the exact date of the election that took Crittenden out of the running as a competitor – only the year – but he had to be elected by the General Assembly, which convenes January through March or so, unless he was elected in a special session. As for Governor of Washington Territory, I know that by the end of Breckinridge's second House term, his wife was pushing him to leave national politics anyway, so that sentiment might have already been present in 1853. Also, financial troubles were probably a factor again. Being one of the first lawyers in that area could have made for a lucrative practice a few years down the road. That's guesswork on my part, though.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"and he decided to decline it " The "and" should not be there.
Given that you are detailing the other side's shenanigans towards Breckinridge in his second congressional election, if he also indulged in such things then, and if the source says so, you should mention it. As one of Hanna's biographers put it, this was the way the game was played on both sides.
It's very ambiguous. Davis says that Breckinridge's friends raised money "to counteract the damage the Whigs were doing". While he goes as far as to give the amounts Letcher supporters were paying people to not vote or to vote for Letcher, this one statement is all that is said about how Breckinridge used the few thousand dollars he raised. If the estimates of $30,000 to $100,000 raised by the Whigs are accurate, it is difficult to believe the $4,000 to $5,000 raised by Breckinridge could effectively combat widespread vote buying, but who knows?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Democracy". Suggest a footnote or parenthetical indicating that he was talking about the party. That may be lost on a 21st century reader
"Southerners thwarted his previous attempts" Perhaps "Southerners had thwarted his previous attempts to accomplish this", perhaps tossing in the fact that the territories might become free states, helping to outvote the South. Also, you sort of dance around the point that the K-N act was passed, but you never quite close the deal on it. You should also explain how it was the South did not block the K-N act, as you've mentioned that they thwarted Douglas's previous attempts.
"Had it taken place, Breckinridge could have been removed from the House; the 1850 Kentucky Constitution " this was long before Powell v. McCormick, of course, but would a clause in a state constitution have really removed him from office? I can see state officials might have kept him off the ballot in future elections.
It's impossible to say for sure, of course, but I think it's possible. If he became ineligible for the office by participating in a duel, the seat could have been declared vacant and a new election ordered by the General Assembly. As evidenced by the subsequent gerrymandering of the district, the Whigs had both the votes and the motivation to take such an action.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"paid only debts those related to powers" Issue here.
"The ascension of the Know Nothing Party further hindered Breckinridge's re-election chances." A few words as to why would be good. I'd also toss a "nativist" or "anti-immigrant" in front of the party name.
"the salary was insufficient" If I'm correct that the minister was expected to pay for many of his own expenses out of the salary, that might be worth a mention.
"presidential elector " When? Surely not in 1856? And if before then, why would that carry particular weight of itself?
Davis says that, at the state Democratic convention in Louisville in 1856, Powell supporters had the pleasure of "seeing Breckinridge appointed a state elector and delegate to Cincinnati". Not sure how else to read it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Tennessee's Andrew Johnson" "Tennessee Governor Andrew Johnson". I really don't see the need to link the name of states, generally, except for in this article probably Kentucky and possibly Iowa.
"a fourth defeated Johnson's Homestead Act." Homestead Bill, I suggest. I mention this incident in Johnson's article. Also, does the VP ever actively debate? Especially the 19th century vice president? I'm a bit taken aback by the suggestion that but for his desire to be seen as an impartial moderator, he'd have been fighting in the trenches of Senate debate. I'm not even sure he was allowed to rule on questions raised to the chair, because I know Hobart changed that.
I didn't really mean to imply that a desire to be impartial motivated his non-interference. Certainly, the rules of debate dictated that, something that clearly frustrated Breckinridge. Davis writes that he had much more influence as a legislator under Pierce than as vice-president under Buchanan. But I also wanted to note that, despite his strong feelings on the issues of the day, he tried – and succeeded in the opinion of most – to be impartial in his duties.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
" Kansas's approval" perhaps "the voters of Kansas Territory's approval"
"they adjourned" refers to convention, so should be "it". I'd make it clearer that Guthrie was also a Kentuckian, perhaps by adding "as
favorite son" after his first mention.
"On June 25, Jefferson Davis" His famous office so blinds people to the rest of his political career that I think you have to throw a "Mississippi Senator" in there.
" rather than a compromise Democrat" reads strangely, you might want to frame it if the source supports about an unwillingness to vote for a slavery supporter, or possibly a Southerner.
"Reminding the audience that Douglas wanted the Supreme Court to decide the issue of slavery in the territories, he pointed out that Douglas then denounced the Dred Scott ruling and laid out a means for territorial legislatures to circumvent it.Reminding the audience that Douglas wanted the Supreme Court to decide the issue of slavery in the territories, he pointed out that Douglas then denounced the Dred Scott ruling and laid out a means for territorial legislatures to circumvent it." I'm not sure I see the relevance of this to B's candidacy.
I read it to be a charge of "flip flopping" by Douglas, an accusation that seems to have carried political weight since the beginning of American political history.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Check over your capitalization of "Southern" to ensure it is as you would have it (there's at least one, in another section, "pro-Southern", which looks a bit odd to me. Also, "southern states" is inconsistently capitalized.)
I'm always torn between the idea of "south" and "southern" as a regional designation or a simple geographic descriptor. I think I've at least got it consistent now.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Governor Magoffin refused to endorse the resolution, preventing its enforcement." Short of with a gun, it was difficult to see how they would enforce it anyway, which was the problem with resolutions of instruction and the like.
Sorry for the delay. Since I got my new computer, I've been spending an inordinate amount of time playing
Civilization V instead of doing Wikipedia. Have responded to some comments above. Hope to get to the rest soon.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)16:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)reply
IMages:
File:John C. Breckinridge statue Lexington KY.jpg I'm unclear on the status of photographs of statues in the US - do we need to know the copyright status of the statue as well as the actual photograph?
run-in links "he was one of three candidates opposing Republican Abraham Lincoln." perhaps try "he was one of three candidates opposing Abraham Lincoln, a Republican."
I think "southern states" rather than "Southern States".
Actually, per the comments from Wehwalt, I think I tried to go with "Southern states", where "Southern" is capitalized because it refers to the South as a region. Changed.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"After the firing on Fort Sumter, he opposed allocating resources..." awkward, can we reword?
"he fled behind Confederate battle lines and joined" odd phrasing for modern writing - suggest "he fled to the south and joined..."
Really? I didn't really think it was all that odd. Plus, "fled south" isn't really accurate. He fled east, then back west, and ended up only a little south (relatively speaking) from where he started. Bowling Green is more west by southwest of Lexington.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"he encouraged Davis to effect a national surrender" very Victorian phrasing - suggest "he encouraged Davis to surrender"
I guess using "effect" as a verb is a little antiquated, but it's not accurate to say he encouraged Davis to surrender. He wanted the Confederacy to surrender, but Davis personally planned to flee for his life unless he got a guarantee of amnesty, I think. Davis was potentially facing capital punishment for treason.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"John Breckinridge believed the federal government..." which John Breckenridge?
I've tried to consistently use "John Breckinridge" for the elder (I've never seen a middle name or initial for him) and "John C. Breckinridge" for the younger.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"As a state representative, he introduced the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, denouncing the Alien and Sedition Acts and asserting that states could nullify them and other federal..." you've switched tenses here .. pick on and stick with it.
"he lost to Constitutional Unionist John Bell, who owned" ... link run on here .. suggest "he lost to the Constitutional Unionist candidate John Bell, who owned..."
"Bell and Illinois' Stephen Douglas exceeded"... run on again ... suggest just dropping "Illinois'"
Changed to "Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas". Since the details of the nominations and election are later in the article, it gives some sense of who the candidate was.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"was the most extreme to which the South would agree" most extreme what?
"Initially supportive of Zachary Taylor for the presidency, he endorsed the Democratic ticket of Lewis Cass and William O. Butler after Taylor became a Whig." can we have a few dates in here to help anchor things chronologically?
need a cite on "impairing [slavery protections] in any form" quotation
It belongs to one of the two footnotes at the end of that sentence, although without either source in front of me, I can't say which. Typically, I try to keep all cites at the end of a sentence. Does this require breaking that convention to keep the footnote adjacent to the quote?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Yeah, you do need it here because it's a reasonably long way away from the cite. Quotes need cites within a word or two of them ending, whether or not that's the end of the sentence. It's the one big thing about citations for GA -
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Davis wrote that his most important work during the session was bank reform." this jars with the previous sentence... can we get a bit better linkage/transition?
The unfortunate thing is, although Davis makes the assertion, he gives no context or details, so this seems to stick out no matter where I put it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
About the committees and his floor leadership? Not really, except his work on the Federal Relations Committee wrt the Compromise of 1850, but moving this up breaks the section's chronology.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)reply
linkage for any of these - (minus the river which is linked) "geologic survey, making the Kentucky River more navigable, chartering a turnpike, incorporating a steamboat company, and funding the Kentucky Lunatic Asylum"?
Are you looking for links to the specific survey, turnpike, steamboat company, and asylum? None of those articles exist, and the source isn't even specific about which turnpike or which steamboat company.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Actually, I was thinking the generic items - not all folks know what a turnpike is anymore... and I'd think the lunatic asylum would merit an article... (you could always try to convince Malleus to flesh it out...)
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Linked "turnpike" and learned that the Kentucky Lunatic Asylum eventually became known as
Eastern State Hospital, so I've linked that. Are asylums an interest of Malleus'? I'm only vaguely familiar with his work, although I generally have a favorable impression.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"The committee's Whig majority favored one calling the compromise a ..." one what?
"Despite this, after Boyd's election, he assigned Breckinridge.." it's slightly unclear who "he" is referring to here.
Really? The only alternative interpretation would be that Breckinridge assigned himself to a lightly-regarded committee, which doesn't make much sense.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Like Young America, Breckinridge favored westward expansion and free trade.." Did you mean "Like Young Americans, Breckinridge favored westward expansion and free trade"?
Well, I was really referring to the movement itself, which was known as "Young America". I'm not sure if "Young Americans" was used as a moniker for the movement's adherents or not.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
It really reads oddly as it is. I suggest figuring out if "Young American" would apply as it jars badly as written. The reader is expecting an adjectival bit and gets a noun.
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"..aspirant William Butler against charges by Florida's Edward Carrington Cabell, a Young American and distant cousin, that he secretly sympathized with the Free Soilers." tangled up here - that last "he secretly" phrase isn't quite clear who "he" means
Not sure what "but Breckinridge showed that Douglas endorsed the Democratic Review a month after it printed its first anti-Butler article" has to do with anything, I'm missing context, I suspect.
Richardson was trying to put distance between Douglas and Sanders' anti-Butler articles in the Democratic Review, but Breckinridge showed that Douglas actually endorsed the Democratic Review after its first article denouncing Butler.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"because the sculptor proposed depicting Washington in a toga." didn't this statue get funded anyway? Would be a great explanatory footnote ...
You know, I'm not actually sure. Davis – the only source I presently have in front of me – says he was opposed to "any more" sculptures depicting Washington in a toga, so apparently, there were several such sculptures, and without knowing the proposed sculptor, it would be difficult to say whether the specific one he opposed was actually completed.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"increasing a subsidy to Collins Line for carrying" I think it should be "increasing a subsidy to the Collins Line for carrying" to make it clear it's not a person.
"Finally, he showed Cornelius Vanderbilt's statement promising to build a fleet of mail ships at his expense and carry the mail for $4 million less than Collins" ... awkward - suggest "Finally, he mentioned Cornelius Vanderbilt's statement promising to build a fleet of mail ships at his expense and carry the mail for $4 million less than Collins."
If I read your comment correctly, I think the confusion comes from the fact that I hadn't explicitly mentioned that it was a written statement. I've rectified that.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Second term:
"to recruit Douglas to his cause" --- Breckenridges or Pierce's cause?
IF the quote is more than a word or so removed from the cite, yes. Quotes need cites ON them, not at the end of the sentence.
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"Pierce told Breckinridge of his nomination to fill the vacancy just before the Senate's January" does this mean that Pierce nominated Breckenridge? Its unclear..
"and his enemy, Linn Boyd" ... but I thought Breckenridge had supported Boyd before?
Not really. He deferred to him in the Speaker's race, and after he got snubbed (twice) by Boyd on committee assignments, the sources say they became factional enemies, although any conflict between them other than electoral contests go unmentioned.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Really don't need to attribute "Heck wrote that the election was between Buchanan and Republican... " to Heck - it's a pretty common belief as I recall from my various US history classes.
I always try to cite observations like this in case there is competing scholarship on the subject. If you're sure there isn't on this point, I'll remove it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"fourth defeated Johnson's Homestead Bill" which Johnson? Do we have a link for the bill?
Both Johnson and the bill are first mentioned and linked in the fourth paragraph under "First term". The bill kept getting defeated and Johnson kept re-introducing it.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"more commodious one" ... very Victorian phrasing, suggest rewording.
Again, no need to attribute to a specific historican "Harrison characterized the race as "Lincoln against Douglas in the north; Breckinridge against Bell in the south"." .. this is pretty common historical consensus as I understand it.
Can we get a better heading here? It implies that it covers his entire Senate career but that's not the case
Yes, really it does, unless you count his service as vice president as part of his Senate career. He was elected in December 1859, but his predecessor's term did not expire until 1861. His term as vice president expired the same day his term as a senator began – March 4, 1861. He served until either his resignation in his October 8 letter or his expulsion on December 2, whichever you regard as valid.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
"reminded the solons that Congress had not approved" - solons??? huh?
Another old-style term that I see a lot in the sources. Keeps me from having to repeat "legislators" so often. Do you think it's too problematic to leave?
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I doubt anyone but me would understand the reference quite honestly. You're falling into the same problem I have - you read so much of a particular type of source that you start adopting the phrasing of them... academic phrasing isn't always the best choice for a general readership encyclopedia. Reword it - no one is going to get the phrase (which traces, by the way, to the ancient Athenian lawgiver
Solon... very typical that a Victorian writer would use it but well out of common usage nowadays.)
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
why list all the offices held by the confederates, but omit the military title for Sherman?
Lack of confidence in my understanding of military rank. Often, I see "General" but then I understand that can be "brigadier general", "major general", "lieutenant general", or full-fledged "general". Didn't know off-hand which Sherman was, and the source didn't say, so I left it out. All that said, I now see that Sherman's is an FA, and it has the dates of his promotions given, so I can accurately determine that his rank at the time was "major general". Added.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Again a lack of rank for "forces under Andrew K. Campbell"...
Same issue. The article on Campbell has a "citation needed" tag on his promotion to lieutenant colonel. If correct, I suppose that would have been his rank at the time. I'll assume good faith and add that.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.
Ealdgyth -
Talk20:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I struck the items where I'm pretty sure I address the concern satisfactorily. I left some others pending your feedback. If they are to your satisfaction, go ahead and strike them if you want. A few will almost certainly merit some further discussion. Thanks for the quick and thorough review.
Acdixon(
talk·contribs)17:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Struck some more and have a few replies on a few more. Suggest, as usual, getting someone else to copyedit for FAC as I'm only sorta good at it. I can pick apart the context with the best of them though!
Ealdgyth -
Talk23:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Political career of John C. Breckinridge. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.