Post by: Sylvi2909 on January 21, 2009, 09:09:30 AM
Were American Presidents Always Inaugurated Outdoors?
By Robert McNamara, Visit My Website
James Monroe
James Monroe: a bitter controversy over chairs led to his outdoor inauguration
Library of Congress
Question: Were American Presidents Always Inaugurated Outdoors?
Answer:
No. Tradition holds that presidents take the oath of office outside the US Capitol, but outdoor inaugural ceremonies were a rarity in the early years of the nation.
The first inauguration did take place outside, but large outdoor inaugurations did not become standard practice for another 40 years.
The first president, George Washington, took the oath of office on a balcony of Federal Hall in New York City on April 30, 1789. A large crowd gathered for the celebratory event.
When Washington was sworn in for the second time, on March 4, 1793, the ceremony took place in Philadelphia, where the federal government was then located. The ceremony was held indoors, in the US Senate chamber of Congress Hall. The second president, John Adams, was also sworn in at Congress Hall, in the chamber of the US House of Representatives, on March 4, 1797.
The Federal Government, and Inaugurations, Moved to Washington, D.C.
The first president to take the oath of office in the new federal city of Washington, D.C. was Thomas Jefferson. He was sworn in on March 4, 1801, in the US Senate chamber of the Capitol, which was still under construction.
Jefferson’s second inaugural, and the two inaugurals of his successor James Madison also took place indoors at the US Capitol.
The tradition of holding inaugurations inside the Capitol building was interrupted because British troops burned the Capitol (as well as the White House) in August 1814. When James Monroe was to be inaugurated in 1817, the Capitol was still being rebuilt.
The US Congress had been meeting in a hastily constructed building known as the “Brick Capitol,” which stood on the site of the current US Supreme Court building. It seemed logical that Monroe would be inaugurated inside that building, but controversy changed those plans.
A Fight Over Chairs Moved an Inauguration Outdoors
A senate committee was in charge of arrangements for Monroe’s inauguration, scheduled for March 4, 1817. The senators wanted to use the more spacious chamber of the House of Representatives, and delivered a letter to the Speaker of the House, Henry Clay, requesting the use of the chamber.
Clay took offense, and not just over the use of the House chamber. Some political opponents of Clay said that he was angry because Monroe had not chosen him to be secretary of state, which, in the early years of the United States, was generally seen as a stepping stone to the presidency.
Those friendly to Clay said his opposition to using the House chamber for the inauguration was because he did not believe the floor would support a large crowd.
Whatever the root of the controversy might have been, a public disagreement about chairs
became the ostensible reason for the squabble. Henry Clay was furious that the senators intended to bring the “fine red chairs” of the Senate into the chamber. He was said to be partial to the “plain democratic chairs” of the House of Representatives.
The impasse over chairs turned ugly,
and the senate committee decided to avoid the whole issue by simply moving the ceremony outdoors. A temporary portico was built outside the Brick Capitol, and that’s where James Monroe took the oath and delivered his first inaugural address, on March 4, 1817.The weather was warm and sunny and a newspaper of the day, the National Intelligencer, described the pleasant and harmonious scene: “Such a concourse was never before seen in Washington; the number of persons present has actually been estimated at from five to eight thousand. Yet notwithstanding the magnitude of the assemblage, we have heard of no accident.”
And while the crowd was enormous for Washington, D.C. at that time, one person was conspicuously absent. Speaker of the House Henry Clay, still angry about chairs, or perhaps because he had not been named secretary of state, did not attend.
Four years later, James Monroe took the oath of office for the second time inside the rebuilt Capitol. John Quincy Adams was also inaugurated inside the Capitol, on March 4, 1825.
Outdoor Inaugurations Returned With Andrew Jackson
When Andrew Jackson ran for president in 1828, he was presented as a man of the people. And when he traveled from Tennessee for his inauguration, thousands of other Americans flocked to Washington to witness the event.
Jackson’s inauguration on March 4, 1829 drew the biggest crowd the city of Washington had ever seen. Thousands gathered at the Capitol, and a ship’s cable was stretched in front of the crowd to hold it back. After Jackson delivered his inaugural address and took the oath (at that time the speech came first), thousands of people did suddenly rush toward the inaugural platform on the east front of the Capitol.
Andrew Jackson retreated inside the building to escape the surging crowd. And his drawing power was such that when a reception was held at the White House that evening, so many people came that the building was nearly destroyed.
Despite the legendarily raucous reputation of Jackson’s inauguration, the idea of holding the ceremony as a large public event took hold. And it became traditional for presidents to take the oath of office on the east front of the Capitol (the location was changed to the west front of the building in 1981).
Post by: krissel on January 22, 2009, 12:52:27 AM
The one inauguration I remember best is Kennedy's. The weather was really cold, it had snowed a lot the day/night before and we had no school. I went to a friend's house to watch and I can still recall wondering why they were outside on such a bitterly cold day.
Post by: kbeartx on January 22, 2009, 02:39:01 AM
KB
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 22, 2009, 08:31:07 PM
BTW, if this is another urban legend, someone stole my password and wrote this!
I'll be asking for some of you as character witnesses at the trial. OK, maybe only one of you...but I'd appreciate the rest of you claiming the 'fifth' or just ignoring any subpoena!
Post by: krissel on January 22, 2009, 11:29:50 PM
Truman, Ford, Bush senior, Clinton and Obama are/were lefties. Reagan started out as a lefty early in life but used his right hand for many purposes, like writing, as an adult.
Interestingly, Al Gore, Ross Perot, John Edwards and John McCain were also left-handed. Bob Dole was also but that was due to his war injuries.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 23, 2009, 04:41:35 PM
And, like I said, I have no proof of these gentlemen's dexterousness(is that a real word?!). And I may not even remember the 'correct' answer!
Post by: krissel on January 23, 2009, 10:31:52 PM
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 24, 2009, 10:37:43 AM
However, you must still pay the freight, handling, transportation plus food and housing (a married couple but not picky eaters, btw) costs for delivery of the prize! Please see details of the contest at www/youvewonbutweprofit.com/rules/
Post by: sandyman on January 24, 2009, 10:56:47 AM
QUOTE(krissel @ Jan 23 2009, 05:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well, not quite that many lefty Presidents.
Truman, Ford, Bush senior, Clinton and Obama are/were lefties. Reagan started out as a lefty early in life but used his right hand for many purposes, like writing, as an adult.
Interestingly, Al Gore, Ross Perot, John Edwards and John McCain were also left-handed. Bob Dole was also but that was due to his war injuries.
Truman, Ford, Bush senior, Clinton and Obama are/were lefties. Reagan started out as a lefty early in life but used his right hand for many purposes, like writing, as an adult.
Interestingly, Al Gore, Ross Perot, John Edwards and John McCain were also left-handed. Bob Dole was also but that was due to his war injuries.
QUOTE
Reagan started out as a lefty early in life but used his right hand for many purposes, like writing, as an adult.
I found that line slightly amusing as, ALLEGEDLY*
Ronald Reagan tried to join the communist party as a young man but was rejected for being to honest or too flaky. I have been unable to find out if it's REALLY true, perhaps somebody else can find more details* Allegedly is frequently used on the BBC comedy show Have I got News For You, as a joke in itself and as a means to avoid litigation
Sandy
Post by: Paddy on January 24, 2009, 11:23:05 AM
James A. Garfield (1831-1881) 20th
Herbert Hoover (1874-1964) 31st
Harry S. Truman (1884-1972) 33rd
Gerald Ford (1913- ) 38th
Ronald Reagan (1911 - ) 40th
George H.W. Bush (1924- ) 41st
Bill Clinton (1946- ) 42nd
And now, of course, Barack Obama. A total of 18% of US presidents have been left-handed, which is approximately twice the rate of left-handedness in the general population where it is estimated at 7-10%, with males more likely to be left-handed than females.
All sorts of interesting tidbits about left-handedness here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed
Post by: krissel on January 24, 2009, 02:11:47 PM
Here are a few links to peruse.
http://www.indiana.edu/~primate/left.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8070303202.html
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08056/860162-294.stm
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 24, 2009, 08:45:39 PM
QUOTE("krissel")
the thesis for my Master's degree was on left-handedness
QUOTE("xABD")
I can only assume that you have found a true source of knowledge!
Well, I was almost right. It appears that you ARE the "true source of knowledge!" 
I should have known better than to make an assumption! 
Post by: krissel on January 25, 2009, 09:52:57 PM
Just that I did spend a lot of time on the subject at one point. In my thesis I was trying to make a point that left-handed students were often given short shrift in the manner in which they were taught. As part of the study I sent out surveys to institutions that dealt with troubled teens to find out if there was a higher percentage of lefties among their 'clientele'. The percentages were slightly above the norm but since I wasn't there for the 'testing' of handedness I was never quite sure of the accuracy of the results. But it was an interesting concept and my thesis professor told me I should try to get it published. Never bothered since I was busy working and had no clue as to how to go about it. Back then there weren't the possibilities available like today for self-publishing.
As I've mentioned before in other threads on this subject, I'm a bit of a mixed breed myself. I draw and write with my right hand but mouse and do a lot of other things (raking, shoveling, folding arms/fingers) like a lefty. I think it has helped with my convergence of artistic/spacial capabilities and the written word. However I'm not one to speak with fluency unless it is something I've studied and am enthusiastic about...not your 'typical' woman who loves to talk on any subject for hours.
Uh, oh, think I've said too much...
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 26, 2009, 09:07:17 AM
And I would truly hope hat you (or anyone else) think that I was being rude or disrespectful of your knowledge and experience. 
If so, it was entirely my fault and my lack of English communications skills! 
My true feelings are mentioned below. QUOTE
...not your 'typical' woman...
I'll have to second that! And I think the whole TS community is in agreement! As a matter of fact, I think you and Paddy have been the backbone, leavening, moderators, negotiators, cajolers, etc. that have often been needed to help keep TS the friendly, informative and welcoming site that it is! [standard waiver]No, I don't own any 'stock' in these two ladies (nor the other fine administrators). I'm just a well satisfied user of this site! And I would seriously doubt anyone would ever consider you as a "know it all!." Not that you aren't extremely intelligent (for a lefty, anyway).
No matter what kind of "breed" you are, I'm happy to have had a chance to work and benefit from your personality and experience. 
Post by: krissel on January 26, 2009, 11:17:32 AM
So no need to castigate yourself, your humor is part of what makes this forum a delight to visit.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 26, 2009, 10:40:02 PM
Probably eating doughnuts instead of out on the street monitoring the miscreants!!! 
Post by: Highmac on January 27, 2009, 03:15:53 AM
My mother said (and I have no memory of this after 60-odd years) that when I started learning to write in infants school (5-7 years) I had to be discouraged from starting each line with my left hand and switching to the right half way along. My memory does, however, recall that - in general - discouragement back then sometimes included being rapped on the knuckles with a wooden ruler....
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 27, 2009, 03:50:57 PM
Now, stop trying to re-highjack this thread!
Post by: kimmer on January 27, 2009, 05:15:43 PM
QUOTE(Xairbusdriver @ Jan 26 2009, 08:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
WHAT?! Some one else is reading this thread I highjacked!! Where are the admins when you need them?! Probably eating doughnuts instead of out on the street monitoring the miscreants!!!
Probably eating doughnuts instead of out on the street monitoring the miscreants!!! I was off doing my civic duty; but they rejected me
and no one even offered us any doughnuts. *more tears*
Post by: Paddy on January 27, 2009, 06:58:17 PM
Post by: kimmer on January 27, 2009, 07:48:31 PM
And here I thought it was probably the law enforcement hubby and close friends that sent me off the jury.
Would have been interesting: there were 4 bags (ea about the size that would 25lb of rice) of marijuana, plus several paper bags filled with more evidence, and the DA was presenting 5 rather impressive witnesses; while the defense was presenting ... the client. Period.
BUT, the defense attorney came across as one sharp cookie and I think he might be able to make mincemeat of the DA.
Post by: krissel on January 28, 2009, 02:08:44 AM
I was glad to be dismissed and go home. Didn't want to spend several days trying to stay awake in the courtroom.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on January 28, 2009, 09:00:17 AM
QUOTE
the defense attorney came across as one sharp cookie and I think he might be able to make mincemeat of the DA
Private practice pays much better than civil service. Sometimes the brightest go for the money. OTOH, that usually provides good protection for the rest of us from government abuse of its great and mighty powers and resources. The downside is that the guilty sometimes go free for too long. That's part of the cost of a free society and a usually even-handed justice system, IMHO.Of course, another problem is trying to find "peers" for some of these miscreants! And why would we want their 'peers' on any jury to begin with!
I suppose most people think a "peer" is someone who would do the same thing they would/did. Sounds like I do! 