Politics in the Gilded Age: patronage, tariffs and the push for reform
Grade 11 Social Studies Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card A, the Pendleton Act, fifth and sixth rules (a federal law, January 16, 1883): "Fifth, that no person in the public service is for that reason under any obligations to contribute to any political fund, or to render any political service, and that he will not be removed or otherwise prejudiced for refusing to do so. Sixth, that no person in said service has any right to use his official authority or influence to coerce [force] the political action of any person or body."
A covered clerk declines to attend a campaign rally and is demoted by a supervisor. What do the rules in card A say about that demotion, Esme asks?
- The sixth rule allows it, because a supervisor's official authority may be used to guide political action
- The fifth rule allows it, because it protects just workers who refuse to give money to a fund
- The fifth rule says a covered worker may not be removed or prejudiced for refusing political service
- Both rules bar any demotion of a federal worker, whatever the reason for the demotion
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card B, what the Pendleton Act reached (Summary in our words, not a quotation, from the National Archives and the Miller Center): At first the Pendleton Act reached only about a tenth of the 132,000 people who worked for the federal government, a figure from the National Archives. The Act was not retroactive, so people already in office stayed in office. It did not reach the great majority of federal workers, or any state or city workers. The share of federal jobs under merit rules has grown since 1883.
Jun's classmate says every clerk hired through patronage in 1881 lost the job when the Act passed. What does card B let Jun reply?
- The classmate is right for federal clerks, because the Act covered the whole federal staff in 1883
- The classmate is wrong, because the Act made federal jobs permanent for those hired under patronage
- The classmate is right, because the Act required patronage hires to be tested again by examination
- The Act was not retroactive, so people already in office stayed in office under it
A note says 'The Pendleton Act ended patronage everywhere.' Which edit does card B support best, Kira asks?
- At first the Act reached about 118,800 of 132,000 federal workers and some state workers as well
- The Act ended patronage in federal jobs, though it did not reach state and city jobs
- At first the Act reached about 1,320 of 132,000 federal workers and no state or city workers
- At first the Act reached about 13,200 of 132,000 federal workers and no state or city workers
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card D, Cleveland's message on the surplus (Summary in our words, not a quotation): In his message of December 6, 1887, President Cleveland told Congress that the Treasury's excess of income over spending for the year had reached about $55 million by December 1. He expected the year's excess to reach $113 million by June 30. With earlier excesses added, he expected the surplus in the Treasury to reach $140 million.
One historian says the surplus pushed Cleveland to attack the tariff; another says he used the surplus to argue for a change he already wanted. Which evidence would best decide, Noah asks?
- The size of the surplus in 1887, since a bigger surplus would show it pushed him
- Congress's votes on the 1887 message, since votes show what Cleveland had intended
- Cleveland's statements on the tariff from before the surplus grew, compared with what he said in 1887
- Harrison's 1889 address, since the next President's view shows what Cleveland had meant
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card J, what the turnout series counts (Summary in our words, not a quotation, from the Census Bureau and Professor Burnham): The turnout figures come from a table by Walter Dean Burnham in the Census Bureau's Historical Statistics. Each figure is an estimate of the share of the potential electorate that voted for President. The note warns that the figures are estimates, that reported votes may be too high or too low, and that the estimates are more exact after 1900 than before. Table "Voter turnout in presidential elections", columns Year | Turnout (percent of estimated electorate). Row 1: 1876 | 81.8. Row 2: 1880 | 79.4. Row 3: 1884 | 77.5. Row 4: 1888 | 79.3. Row 5: 1892 | 74.7. These figures are estimates. Data: US Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States (1975 edition), series Y 27, p. 1072 (estimates by Walter Dean Burnham).
Turnout was 77.5 percent in 1884 and 79.3 in 1888. What does card J warn Pia about reading that rise?
- The rise of 1.8 points shows that the tariff and the civil service stirred up voters in 1888
- The figures show a rise of 18 points, which is too large to be an estimate
- The figures are estimates, so a rise of 1.8 points may not be a real change
- The figures are useless, because turnout estimates before 1900 cannot be compared
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card H, why the Pendleton Act passed (Summary in our words, not a quotation, from the National Archives, the National Park Service and the Miller Center): Reformers had pressed for change since 1865, when a bill for a Civil Service Commission failed. In 1871 Congress let President Grant set up a commission, but support was weak and Grant gave up. In 1877 President Hayes ordered federal workers to stay out of campaign management. After President Garfield was assassinated on July 2, 1881, reform groups pointed to the spoils system, and the National Archives says Congress passed the Act after that event. The Miller Center adds that President Arthur signed it in part because of his party's losses in the elections of 1882.
A classmate says Garfield's assassination caused the Pendleton Act. What does card H let Ren say about that claim?
- It was the sole cause, because the National Archives says Congress passed the Act after that event
- It was one cause among several, and the cards do not rank them
- It was not a cause, because Hayes's order in 1877 came first and explains the whole Act
- It was the cause the Miller Center names, while the National Archives names the 1882 elections
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card I, the election of 1884 (Summary in our words, not a quotation, from the Miller Center): The election of 1884 was one of the closest of the century. Grover Cleveland won 48.5 percent of the popular vote and James G. Blaine won 48.2 percent. Cleveland carried New York by about 1,200 votes out of more than a million cast. The Miller Center says that a few more votes for Blaine in New York would have given him that state's electoral votes and the presidency. The sources do not say how many Mugwumps there were or how many of them voted.
A note says 'The Mugwumps elected Cleveland in 1884.' How should Tala answer that note, using card I?
- The note is right, because reformers were the largest group among the voters of New York State in 1884
- The note is wrong, because a close national race shows the Mugwumps did not matter
- A 1,200-vote margin in New York means small groups could matter, but no source counts Mugwump voters
- The note is wrong, because Blaine carried New York by about 1,200 votes
Zee's classmate says Cleveland's 48.5 to 48.2 percent lead in 1884 gave him a mandate. What does card I let Zee reply?
- The classmate is right, because 48.5 percent is nearly half of the votes and half is a mandate
- A 0.3-point national lead and about 1,200 votes in New York show a close election, not a clear mandate
- The classmate is wrong, because Cleveland's 1,200-vote margin in New York was about 1.2 percent of the state
- The classmate is wrong, because a candidate who wins in New York cannot have a mandate
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card G, Harrison in the same address: "I look hopefully to the continuance of our protective system and to the consequent development of manufacturing and mining enterprises in the States hitherto [until now] wholly given to agriculture as a potent influence in the perfect unification of our people."
Harrison hopes protection will be 'a potent influence in the perfect unification of our people.' What does he assume, Ari asks?
- That protecting industry would develop industrial states and so tie the regions together
- That each state would become a manufacturing state within a few years of the tariff
- That industry in agricultural states would divide the regions, which he welcomed
- That the protective system would end farming in the States that had been given to agriculture
Use this
Reform, prices and votes, 1883 to 1889 (cards A to J and a table). Card C, President Grover Cleveland, writing to Congress, December 6, 1887: "These laws, as their primary and plain effect, raise the price to consumers of all articles imported and subject to duty [tax on imports] by precisely the sum paid for such duties. Thus the amount of the duty measures the tax paid by those who purchase for use these imported articles."
Bo wants to test Cleveland's claim that duties raise the price consumers pay. Which new evidence would best test it?
- The size of the surplus, since a big surplus shows that duties raised consumer prices
- Another President's speech on the tariff, since a President's view settles what prices did in those years
- The number of votes in the next election, since voters respond to prices at the polls
- Prices of the same goods before and after a change in duties, with other price changes noted