Heirs of the Founders: The Epic Rivalry of Henry Clay, John Calhoun and Daniel Webster, the Second Generation of American Giants

H.W. Brands is easily one of my favorite historians. His resume of material focuses on America; the events and the people – from Benjamin Franklin to Ronald Reagan. I’ve never been disappointed by any of his works. His writing is clear, easy to understand, and told in what I would call digestible “chunks”. I imagine he would be one of those professors that the students hope to get as their teacher. According to Wikipedia, Brands believes that Americans tend to focus too much on the individual in the White House and that the constitution was written to give plenty of the other movers and shakers just as much, if not more, decision making power.This book could be looked at as a perfect example of this point. The three individuals highlighted in the title of this book never made it to the White House (although one DID get elected VP). They all tried, some came close, but they never held the distinction of President. As Brands shows us in this well-crafted book, that didn’t really matter. These individuals deserve a lot of credit for many of the opinions and decisions that they crafted to help steer American policy. Some decisions good, others not so much.Strangely though, it needs to be pointed out that this book really isn’t a biography of these individuals. True, they are the main focus of the 40 years or so history presented here, but whereas they serve as the lead roles in this historical account, Brands gives us plenty of supporting players as well. One could argue that this book is more of a primer of the history of the United States from about 1812 – 1852. Not only was this the time when these three protagonists were their most vigorous and influential, but it was also a time in America’s history that was arguably the most pivotal. This was the time when slavery dominated the headlines and always seemed to be the biggest bone of contention that divided the country like nothing it had ever seen or has seen since.Slavery, though, doesn’t necessarily take up the bulk of this book. There were plenty of other issues that were hotly debated that seemed to divide the country and cause one to quickly take allegiance to one side or the other. Interestingly, this was the time when one could make the argument that there weren’t really two “main” political parties as we know now. What we now call “Democrat” and “Republican” hadn’t been clearly defined at this point, and the young country was still struggling to find a foothold in policies that could positively influence the country. An example: the term “bank” is so widely used now, yet such a concept in the early 1800s was deemed preposterous by many yet deemed highly necessary for others. It seems a bit silly now, but the young country was still learning and deciding how to move forward in uncharted waters. So the federal bank, the reasons for and against, is one of the hot topics that these three find themselves either defending or fighting. Other topics include tariff laws, Texas, California, the many ‘compromise’ bills, and of course slavery.All three of these individuals died in the early 1850s – which was about ten years before the U.S. Civil War began, and so the narrative basically ends when these three go to the grave. One almost wishes there could have been more detail leading up to the disastrous conflict, but this really isn’t the author’s point. He succeeds in showing how these three were very instrumental in policy making that helped get the country where it ended up shortly after they passed away. One could safely argue that none of these three “caused” any of the latter events to happen; yet they were simply the ones with the most influence that guided how many of their constituents felt at the time.I would conclude by saying that even if you don’t think you necessarily want to read about these three politicians that dominated the stage roughly 200 years ago, this is still an excellent resource that covers the pivotal years of the country’s history. This book left me wanting more. I wanted to read more about relevant people and events such as Andrew Jackson, John Tyler, James Polk, The Missouri Comprise, The California Gold Rush, The U.S. War with Mexico, and many many others. This book kept me well entertained in addition to making me appreciate history all the more. Another solid effort by H.W. Brands.

H.W. Brands is an excellent historian, highly skilled at researching a topic and at telling a tale in engaging, illuminating prose. This, his latest book, contains many of those elements, making it an enjoyable and informative read. But it is not without its problems.One inherent problem with a book such as "Heirs of the Founders" is that it focuses on the lives of three different men--Daniel Webster, Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun. It is difficult enough to compile a biography of one individual in less than 400 pages, but Brands tells the reader about these three men in only 370 pages of text. Such an approach is bound to leave out much, and that is what keeps this good book from being a great one.For example, Brands says that Thomas Jefferson "rode the wave of opposition [to the Alien and Sedition Acts] into the White House . . ." But the Election of 1800, to which Brands is referring, was far more complex. Indeed, had there been no Three-Fifths Compromise, John Adams would have won the election outright. The compromise allowed southern states to count slaves as three-fifths of a person when determining the state's population and thus the number of representatives the state would get in the House. They would each get an equal number of electors. As it was, no candidate got a majority of electoral votes, sending the election into the House, which elected Jefferson. A simple sentence or two would have clarified the issue.Brands brings up the gag rule but does not explain what it was. He seems to assume his reader knows. The gag rule was a resolution in the House that tabled, without discussion, all petitions regarding slavery. But Brands doesn't tell us this.In addition, Brands makes no mention of Daniel Webster's affair with Sarah Goodrich, a young artist. The affair took place in the late 1820s, while Webster's wife was dying of stomach cancer back in Massachusetts. This behavior certainly gives an insight into Webster's character, but Brands seems to be in a hurry and so skips or glosses over many aspects of these three men and their times.In another example, Brands does not mention Henry Clay's most famous quote--"I'd rather be right than be president." Spoken in 1838, it was seen as sour grapes by many. Nor does he mention that Clay was an inveterate gambler. Or that he could, at times, be downright nasty.The fact that the book has fifty-nine chapters in 370 pages only adds to the rushed feeling of "Heirs of the Founders." What Brands has given us is good. But another hundred or so pages could have made it great.

Excellent book for those wishing to be educated (as opposed to indoctrinated) about a relatively obscure, but extremely important period, in American history.Those with some knowledge of our history tend to think in terms of the Great Wars: The Revolution, the Civil War, WWI-WWII, while overlooking the 'minor wars' - for example, the War of 1812 and the Mexican War - and the interim periods leading up to the Great Wars: Periods during which the seeds of those great wars were planted.This book, although it seems to present itself as biographies of 3 great American statesmen, (none of whom achieved the Presidency) it is perhaps more a history of the post revolutionary period, starting with the War of 1812 (American Revolution II) to the Mexican and then the Civil Wars, using those 3 men and their political histories as a means to tell the history of two 'forgotten wars' and that 'interim' period.Mr. Brands's writing is lively and engaging, and delves deeply into the fundamental issues driving the era in question. Highly recommended.

Wanting to know something about Clay, Calhoun and Webster, I originally order the Great Triumvirate. Unfortunately after plowing through the first 100 pages, I was so bored by all the economic jargon that I went back and found Brands' book. So much more enjoyable. Covering the same period and actors, it was a joy to read.