James Buchanan: The American Presidents Series: The 15th President, 1857-1861

by Jean H. Baker

A provocative reconsideration of a presidency on the brink of Civil War

Almost no president was as well trained and well prepared for the office as James Buchanan. He had served in the Pennsylvania state legislature, the U.S. House, and the U.S. Senate; he was Secretary of State and was even offered a seat on the Supreme Court. And yet, by every measure except his own, James Buchanan was a miserable failure as president, leaving office...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0805069461
• ISBN13: 9780805069464
• Release Date: June 2004
• Publisher: Times Books
• Length: 192 Pages
• Weight: 0.71 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 5.7" x 8.6"

Customer Reviews

Worst Biography I Ever Read

Since it was part of a series about U.S. Presidents, I thought it would be fairly decent. It wasn't. It was a total hatchet job, as if all she knew about James Buchanan was that he is often at the bottom when "historians" rate the Presidents. This book just repeats the falsehoods that led to that low rating, and it barely skims the surface of his life. If you really are interested in learning much more about President Buchanan read the Philip S. Klein biography, James Buchanan. It goes into far more detail, and after reading it you will have a far better opinion of James Buchanan, and a much lower opinion of the so-called historians who rate his Presidency at the bottom.

Accessible biography of a failed presidency

James Buchanan came to the presidency with a wonderful resume. And he failed dismally. This brief biography, part of the well done "The American Presidents" series, tries to explain that disconnect. In the recurring introduction to each volume in the series that he edited, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. remarked that (Page xvii) "To succeed, presidents must not only have a port to seek but they must convince Congress and the electorate that it is a port worth seeking." And "there's the rub" for Buchanan. His background was impeccable: Pennsylvania state legislature, U. S. House of Representatives and Senate, Secretary of State, Ambassador to Russia and England. As Jean Baker, the author of this slim volume says (Page 7): "Critical times often summon forth our best presidents, and it is worth taking the measure of those presidents who, given the opportunity, failed to rise to greatness. James Buchanan was one of those." The Democratic nomination for president culminated at the Convention. Franklin Pierce (incumbent president), Stephen Douglas, Lewis Cass, and Buchanan. After some maneuvering, Buchanan's supporters helped get him the nomination. After his election, though, he ran into a buzz saw: a panic (depression), violence in Kansas, and the horrific "Dred Scott" Supreme Court decision. Buchanan selected a Cabinet that was very much pro-Southern, some of his closest allies were from the South, and he alienated Democrats such as Stephen Douglas. He did not recognize the danger of the slavery issue and watched as his pro-Southern stance split the Democratic Party, enabling the one thing anathema to him to occur--the election of a Republican in 1860, Abraham Lincoln. Why did he fail so miserably? Unreflective prosouthernism is one part of the explanation, according to Baker. Other factors--his arrogant and uncompromising use of power. So, an interesting essay on a failed president. I think that personality quirks might be overemphasized in this book. Overall, though, a useful volume for those who want a quick introduction to the presidents.

And nooww... James! Buchanan!!!

There are 72 reviews of this brief and simply-written biography of a President who came to office with superb qualifications and who bungled the job that perhaps no one could have done. I found the book quite adequate as an introduction to the decade of the 1850s. Causes have to precede effects; anyone interested in the causes of the Civil War ought to have a good look at the events that led to Buchanan's election, and the dismal decision Buchanan made in reaction to those events. Honestly, however, you needn't buy the book. Just read the 72 reviews herewith. It will take some patience, and some tolerance for bad syntax, but it will reveal just exactly how polarizing the Civil War was, and still is. This "American Presidents" series is surprisingly top notch. I also recommend the biography of US Grant, the most underrated and slandered chief exec of American history.

Fascinating profile of a failed presidency

Jean Baker is not subtle. Right from the outset, she makes it clear that James Buchanan was one of the worst presidents ever. He was a man who served as a state legislator in Pennsylvania, congressman, senator, Secretary of State and minister to the Court of Saint James. Yet, despite this extensive resume', when he finally became president at age 65, he failed. The United States, as it moved ever closer to disunion and Civil War, had a series of weak presidents who were unable to handle the situation, most notably, Millard Fillmore and Franklin Pierce. Baker argues that Buchanan was a poor president but not because of similar weaknesses. Rather, he was quite active but pursued dreadfully wrong policies. As a young congressman, Buchanan became friendly with southern congressmen and senators and, in fact boarded with some of them. Because he was a bachelor, there is speculation as to whether there was a homosexual component to his relationships. Regardless, he came to identify with the South and with its cause of slavery. Although a northerner, he supported slavery but then again, his home state of Pennsylvania was a lot closer geographically to slave states than to New England. He had sectional differences with New Englanders and disliked them intensely. Before he became president, Buchanan was a staunch supporter of "manifest destiny" and, serving in the Polk administration, helped to advance that policy. No only did he want to expand west, he also wanted to expand south, seeking to expand our borders into Mexico, Central America and Cuba. This desire to acquire territory extended into his presidency. One of the reasons was to add new slave territory to the United States. As presdient, He actively sought to admit Kansas as a slave state and, despited the fact that the majority of residents of Kansas were aginst slavery, he attempted to rig elections on the ratification of a pro slavery state constitution. There is evidence, that as president elect, Buchanan lobbied Supreme Court Justices to rule as they did on the Dred Scott case. Buchanan was shortsighted in that he thought that once an issue was decided, whether it was the Dred Scott decision or the adoption of a pro slavery constituion, the issue would go away. Abolitionsist were not, however, going to give up their opposition to slavery any more than someone who is "pro life" would give up opposition to abortion following Roe v. Wade. Thus, his extreme pro slavery approach ended up dividing the nation even more. After actively supporting slavery and the southern cause, Buchanan was slow to act when South Carolina seceded after Lincoln's election. He continued to be advised by cabinet members and advisors from states which were soon to also secede. He did not immediately move to secure United States installations in the south, such as Fort Sumter and, indeed he weakened the United States' position there by ordering that federal troops withdraw to the much less defensible Fort Moultrie. Alth

The Peter Principal Applied

The author, Jean Baker, wrote on page 1 "After the election of James Madison....no president had ever come to office with more impressive credentials. Nor, to this day, has any matched Buchanan's public positions." Buchanan served in the Pennsylvania state legislature, served in the U.S. House and Senate, was Andrew Jackson's minister to Russia, was secretary of state under James Polk, and was minister to the Court of St. James in the 1850s. With his background, the question must be asked "why was Buchanan, arguably, our worst president?" The author states "This book seeks to suggest some of the reasons for Buchanan's failure and specifically to explain the gap between Buchanan's experience and training before his presidency and his lamentable performance in office.... only in the literal sense did the Civil War begin.... When the Confederates fired on Fort Sumter. It began in Buchanan's administration." The book outlines Buchanan's political career. While still a Unionist, by the 1830s he was "more and more a states rights man" as he gravitated toward southerners after arriving in Washington and considered New Englanders radical extremists. By the 1840s, he opposed any interference with slavery and by then desperately wanted the presidency. In the Senate he espoused the principle of manifest destiny. As a bachelor he cultivated southern friends many of whom, as president, he included in his cabinet. Having observed chief executives for more than thirty-five years, when Buchanan took the presidential oath in 1857, he knew more about the American presidency than anyone in the United States. However, the composition of his "cabinet revealed the incoming chief executive as no peacemaker...." Who was ".... surrounded by advisers who agree with him." The author narrates Buchanan's presidency as he moved from one ill-advised solution after another when solving critical problems. He continued his strong pro-southern attitude and acted accordingly. He unethically influenced the court's decision on the Dred Scott case, and seriously mishandled the situation in Kansas. The author notes "By taking the side of the South, Buchanan had split the Democrats, and in the process he had ensured his nightmare: the election of a Republican in 1860...." stating "The destructive effects of the president's policy were immediately apparent in the 1858 fall congressional elections when a disproportionate number of northern Democrats lost...." The text gives a fascinating account of Buchanan's final year as president. The text notes that in 1857 Buchanan had sent troops into Utah to handle a problem with Brigham Young and the Mormons; yet when the secession crisis developed, and the Fort Sumter confrontation developed, he failed to respond firmly in like manner thereby encouraging secession. Amazingly his southern cabinet members and political associates treasonably passed critical government plans and information to the seceding state governments. Interesting