The Strange Hybrid Of The Early American State

Author(s):  
Max M. Edling
2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (03) ◽  
pp. 627-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gautham Rao

This article explores the federal marine hospitals of the early republic, the first public health care system in US history. Beginning in 1798, the federal government collected twenty cents per month from mariners' wages and used this revenue to subsidize medical care for sick and disabled merchant mariners. Previous studies have traced links between marine hospitals and modern public policy. By studying governance from the bottom up, this article takes a different approach. I argue that jurists, physicians, and officials' regulation of sailors' entitlement to public health care facilitated and reflected a transformation of national authority. Between 1798 and 1816, sailors' entitlement was a local matter, based on the traditional paternalist understandings of maritime laborers as social dependents. By 1836, though, the federal Treasury redefined entitlement around a newly calculus of productivity: only the productive were entitled to care at the marine hospitals. This story about governance, federal law, and political economy in the early United States suggests that the early American state was a more vibrant participant in the market and society than has been previously understood.


2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
William D. Adler

This article reconsiders early American state capacity through a close examination of the U.S. Army Corps of Topographical Engineers. The topographical corps, a bureau in the antebellum War Department, developed a form of conditional bureaucratic autonomy far earlier than recognized in previous scholarship, giving it a central role in shaping national economic development policies, especially in the nation's periphery. Unlike robust bureaucratic autonomy, such as that described by Daniel Carpenter (2001, 2010; see footnote 4), conditional autonomy is highly contingent and can quickly fracture if the surrounding environment changes. The long-serving chief of the corps, Col. John J. Abert, shaped the opinions of his supposed principals by managing the ideas, information, and proposals directed to them. When faced with challenges, the corps proved to be a flexible organization that adapted its methods to accomplish its preferred ultimate goals using different instruments. In the end, however, the corps' autonomy was threatened when it became involved in the sectional politics surrounding the potential building of a transcontinental railroad line. Once the corps lost several of the conditions supporting its autonomy, its downfall was swift. This article thus joins a recent wave of scholarship highlighting strengths within the early American state by foregrounding the role of the armed forces in statebuilding.


Leonardo ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 120-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Siri Johnson

In the 19th century, printing methods made significant advances that allowed mass production of illustrated texts; prior to that time, illustrated texts were expensive and rare. The number of illustrated texts thus rose exponentially, increasing the rate of information transfer among scientists, engineers and the general public. The early American state geological reports, funded by the state legislatures, were among the pioneering volumes that used the new graphic capabilities in the improved printing processes for the advancement of science. They contain thousands of illustrations—woodcuts, etchings, lithographs and hand-painted maps—that may be of interest to historians of science, technology, art and culture.


Polity ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-339
Author(s):  
Richard R. John

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna O. Law

Why did it take the U.S. national government until 1882 to gain control over migration policies from the states, and what does this situation say about the strength of the early American State? This phenomenon is especially curious, since the control of entry into and across a nation is so fundamental to the very definition of a State. I argue that the delay of the national government takeover was not due to a lack of administrative capacity. Instead, there were regionally specific reasons that the states preferred to retain control of migration policy. The national government did not take over migration policy because of the strong nineteenth-century political-cultural understanding that many migration policies were properly within the province of local control. This article explains the timing and sequencing of state and federal controls over nineteenth-century migration policy and what this timing meant for the freedom of movement of many politically vulnerable classes of people.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document