Talk:David Rice Atchison Information & Talk:David Rice Atchison Links at HealthHaven.com

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Rice Atchison article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.

WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government

(Rated B-Class)

Biography portal

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.

B

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as Mid-priority).

WikiProject Kentucky

(Rated B-Class, Mid-importance)

Kentucky portal

David Rice Atchison is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia.

Template Usage · Change Patrol · Articles Requested! · Become a Member · Project Talk

B

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Kentucky alerts

WikiProject U.S. Congress

(Rated B-Class)

	v • d • e 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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

WikiProject Missouri

Missouri portal

This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history WikiProject (Rated Start-Class)

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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces (general topics):
	Military biography task force
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	United States military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
	American Civil War task force

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on March 4, 2008.

[edit] "Acting President" claim

It seems to me that the issue in dispute is really a question of constitutional law. I think arguments for either position (i.e., that Atchison was or was not de jure President) should be based on clear legal reasoning.

Perhaps we could introduce some links to authority supporting the various points, such as to Article II of the Constitution, the 25th Amendment and 3 U.S.C §19?

I'm not a U.S. constitutional lawyer. I won't make any alteration to the Atchison article, but here's my two cents' worth: the combined effect of clauses 2, 6 and 8 of Article II is that Zachary Taylor became President immediately James Polk's term ended. In my opinion, the Inauguration and oath of office do not operate to render a person President or to confer any of the President's powers upon him. Furthermore, clause 6 of Article II does not prescribe a transfer of the Presidencybut only deals with the exercise of the President's powers by another person "(i)n Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office." There is no suggestion that James Polk was removed/impeached, died, resigned or became disabled. I would contend that Taylor became President, having a been elected to that office, at the moment when James Polk ceased to hold it.

All that being said, I would ask that somebody more expert in this topic than I check this matter out and add some specific references to the article. Wulfilia 15:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The project Unusual articles has been has been linking this article as an example of "unusual articles" on Wikipedia. I have just deleted the reference and link to to this article on Wikipedia:Unusual articles, because I believe that, in its current form (in which there is no complex discussion of or consensus on the "unusual aspect"), its presence there tends to make Wikipedia seem eccentric or unreliable. I hope I have not offended anybody by doing this - do please contact me if you have a problem with it. Wulfilia 15:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

This is a cute story but according to the Constitution one does not become President until taking the Oath of Office.

The President is an office, not merely a rank. Being the highest ranking official in the government is not enough to make you President.

Agreed. I think it would be more accurate to say that there was no sitting President during that time, but that if some emergency had required the presence of one, he could have been sworn in to the job for that purpose. --LDC

This is true.

This isn't true. If an emergency required the presence of one, then Taylor would have been sworn in, because he was the President-elect. That's why this whole urban legend is bogus. —Cleared as filed. 18:33, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I have a qualm with the debunking section - doesn't the word 'absurd' kind of imply an non-neutral standpoint on the article?

Shouldn't it be something like 'incorrect'? --ac

How could Polk's secretary of state be next in line? Polk couldn't appoint his cabinet yet because, he wasn't president yet.!!!!! Rt66lt 20:41, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I have my president's mixed up. It still wouldn't matter, Buchanan's term would have ended as well. Rt66lt 22:22, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

"Facts behind the myth" should be changed to a different title. It sounds like it's going to say 'these are the things to support it' then later another heading of things which would debunk it. This is just one man's opinion. Gohst 11:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

The Presidential term begins on time. Oath or not. The oath is not required to become President of the US. It is required to "enter upon the execution of the office" There were in total six Presidents who took the oath one or two days after their term began. Monroe 1821, Tyler 1841, Taylor 1849, Fillmore 1850, Arthur 1881, Coolidge 1923. (Info from www.rulers.org)--Gerard von Hebel 12:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

This is wrong. The "term" and the "execution of the office" are two different concepts in constitutional law. The "term" is a fixed period of four years and is independent of the individual(s) who may hold the office of president during that time. Consider the 22d Amendment, which contains language about finishing a term to which someone else was elected. The 20th Amendment merely states that the "term" begins at noon on January 20. You cannot "enter upon the execution of the office"--that is, become president--until you take the oath. 1995hoo (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course, the whole legend falls apart if you consider one point: even if it were true that one must take the oath of office for one to be President, then David Rice Atchinson could not have been President for one day as he did not take the oath of office either. Mike Beidler 23:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

And, behold, if I had read the article before I commented, I would have seen that my point has already been made. Note to self: read the article before engaging in the discussion. Oy! Mike Beidler 23:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Tangentially related: the reason to swear the VP in first is to establish the proper order of succession if something bad happens to the President-elect. Using this month's inauguration as an example: If Obama had been sworn in first, then incapacitated before Biden was sworn in, we would have gotten Cheney as President, and it would be debatable whether Biden would be allowed to take over from Cheney as President or would serve as VP under him. With Biden sworn in first, he would have been president for only a moment if something had happened to Bush before Obama could be sworn in. And of course, if something had happened to Obama before he could be sworn in, Biden is already the VP, so the normal succession takes place. bwcbwc 0:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] An Oath Is Required

To clarify a mistake in the article, Art. II Sec. 1(8) requires that the President take an oath prior to entering office. The oath is as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." So, Sen. Atchison was not President as he took no oath.

[edit] Beginning of "term" - midnight or noon?

There's been discussion on Talk:Herbert Hoover about just when an old President gave way to the new before the 20th Amendment. It seems that this is something that wasn't explicit, or for that matter even really debated - on the morning of March 4th the outgoing and incoming Presidents were going to be saluted no matter who was in office. If the old term expired at midnight then that would in theory create a huge number of additional "Acting Presidents" - perhaps another reason why this is bogus.

(If I remember correctly the President of Ireland does have something similar to this idea - technically there's an acting Presidency made up of the organs of government between the end of a term and the oath taking, even when the incumbent is re-elected.)

This article is stating confidently that Atchison's "term" began at noon - was there any opinion at all at the time as to when these things happened? Or did they just no care whereas nowadays a big fuss is made if a President is to be sedated for a mere couple of hours? Timrollpickering 22:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

And there's been a series of changes on this, some asserting that it's been "established" that the Presidential term began/expired at midnight. Can I ask exactly where this is? Talk:Herbert Hoover#March 4th 1933 details some of the imprecision on this, showing that neither was it clear nor that anyone seems to have argued about this.

Also if the whole basis for Atchison's claim to have been acting President is that the incoming President hadn't yet taken the oath then umpteen Presidents Pro Temporare and later House Speakers etc.. had mini Acting Presidencies for mornings (and perhaps more substantially any two term President technically had a break inbetween - how silly does this get?). Timrollpickering 11:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

You're correct, it's silly. Most Presidents, don't take their oaths until Minutes (some a half-hour), after the term begins (Noon EST). For example the 2005 Inauguration, President Bush did not take his oath EXACTLY at NOON EST, does that mean for a few minutes there was no President? No it doesn't. GoodDay 23:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parentheses within parentheses

Is there some less awkward way of phrasing this? --

"Born in Frogtown (later named Kirklevington [which is now part of Lexington])"

AnonMoos 01:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

"Born in Frogtown (later Kirklevington, now part of Lexington)" or "Born in Frogtown (later Kirklevington, now incorporated into Lexington)" — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 02:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have no problems if you simply want to nuke the reference to Lexington, Kentucky. I have done various google and print.google searches and the nae is basically in incosequential unless somebody can pop up with a refrence. In the for what it's worth department, my intest in the article is via northwest Missouri via (Platte Purchase) from which I'm a native. I wondered in here becuse of the Battle of Liberty article (which I intend to extensively revise) which in turn in involves with my obsession for Missouri in the American Civil War. It's now watchlisted. (along withe various associated pages) If you want to disucss his reputation feel free to discuss with my talk page. If you hit the various pages associated with him, I will probably respond in some form (and actually appreciate the attention). Americasroof 03:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cause of Death?

There's no mention of how this man died or what from.--Heavy 22:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bottom line

Regardless of most stuff in this myth, the bottom line is Atchison could not have been President because his Senate term as President Pro Tempore ended on March 3, 1849 because it does not carry over from session to session, so on March 4th, 1849 he would NOT have been next in line. Another thing if he would have still been in line the wording at the time was that the next person in line would "act" as President not "become" President a wording that was changed in later years. Also it does clear state that one is not President until they take the Oath of office, which he never did.Rogue Gremlin 02:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the issue of succession isn't as cut-and-dried as the various advocates make out, since (1) Atchison, unlike the outgoing Pres/VP, was re-elected; (2) an acting president doesn't need to be sworn in; and (3) according to one of the external links, he was sworn in several minutes before the new Pres/VP. I didn't know it was Wikipedia's job to decide questions that are not unambiguously resolved in authoritative secondary sources. Just state the germane facts, and get rid of all the stuff declaring he was or wasn't president. JoeFink (talk) 22:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why was Atchison's Direct Quote About the Event Deleted?

I don't understand why swampfire deleted Atchison's own referenced description of the event. Atchison sure said it better than all the rambling and humorless edits. Here's the section that swampfire deletedAmericasroof (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Atchison discussed the claim in a September 1872 issue of the Plattsburg Lever:

“

It was in this way: Polk went out of office on the 3d of March 1849, on Saturday at 12 noon. The next day, the 4th, occurring on Sunday, Gen. Taylor was not inaugurated. He was not inaugurated till Monday, the 5th, at 12 noon. It was then canvassed among Senators whether there was an interregnum (a time during which a country lacks a government). It was plain that there was either an interregnum or I was the President of the United States being chairman of the Senate, having succeeded Judge Mangum of North Carolina. The judge waked me up at 3 o'clock in the morning and said jocularly that as I was President of the United States he wanted me to appoint him as secretary of state. I made no pretense to the office, but if I was entitled in it I had one boast to make, that not a woman or a child shed a tear on account of my removing any one from office during my incumbency of the place. A great many such questions are liable to arise under our form of government.^[1]

”

It's a good quote, and Atchison's tongue appears lodged so firmly in his cheek that a crowbar would be necessary to move it :-). Swampfire's edit notes say: this quote was not backed up by the reference also it stated the article was about him, not by him, there was no active link to this quote. Which is odd, because it's taken verbatim from [1]. I'd be inclined to put it back in. Johnmc (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I see no reason for it to be removed. Since no one has given any reason in the last 9 month, I've restored it. TJRC (talk) 20:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I was actually circling around to post it again today! I never ceased to be amazed at the shrill humorless edits to this article on this subject. Atchison never made any pretense to the position. This is more of an amusing interlude than a serious constitutional crisis. Americasroof (Americasroof)21:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research?

Isn't the usual wikipedia approach to *not* decide for ourselves issues like this, but instead cite verifiable sources indicating what happened, and what the various issues and arguments are? Why are we even debating whether he *actually* was president? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.58.158.27 (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Because this is an encyclopaedia, and I guess an encyclopaedia reports the facts. And the fact apparently is that a group of people consider(ed) that Atchison was president, and a group consider that he wasn't. And in any case, isn't "discussion" what this page is for? It's only OR if it appears on the article page. Johnmc (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Taylor Was President

On March 4, 1849, Zachary Taylor was President. He was elected, along with Millard Fillmore, in 1848, on the Whig ticket. Polk's term ended on 4 March, 1849, at noon, whereupon Taylor became Chief Executive, as he had been elected to do so. He refused to be sworn in on a Sunday, as he did not believe in working on Sunday, but that fact did not keep him from being President, and he continued to be President on that and every Sunday until his untimely death on 9 July 1850. Being the elected President does not, and did not, hinge upon taking the Oath of Office--the reverse is true. There is one President who never took the Oath of Office--Franklin Pierce. He simply pledged his allegiance to the republic. He was so grief-stricken by the recent death of his son Benny, and depressed also over having lost the emotional support of his wife, that he could not lay his hand on the bible. This did not keep him from being President.

So, Zachary Taylor--and no one else--was President. Even if Atchison was legally President(which he clearly was NOT), the Democrats would have taken full advantage of his temporary position, which they did not. He slept all of that evening.99.59.250.62 (talk) 20:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)astroswift

[1]

Contents