Riot at the White House: President John Tyler's Bank Veto Sparks Historic Uproar

On August 16, 1841, President John Tyler stunned his own party and the nation by vetoing a bill to re-establish the Second Bank of the United States. The fallout was immediate and explosive. Within days, enraged members of the Whig Party gathered outside the White House in what became the most violent protest ever held on its grounds - firing guns, hurling stones, and burning Tyler in effigy.

The riot marked a turning point in Tyler's presidency and exposed deep fractures within the Whig Party, which had swept into power just months earlier under President William Henry Harrison. Tyler, Harrison's vice president, had assumed office after Harrison's sudden death in April 1841. Though nominally a Whig, Tyler's political roots were Jacksonian, and his views on banking and states' rights clashed with the party's core agenda.

The Bank Bill and Tyler's Veto

The bill in question, championed by Whig leader Henry Clay, sought to revive a national bank - the Fiscal Bank of the United States - to stabilize the economy and restore federal control over currency. The original Second Bank had been dismantled in 1836 under President Andrew Jackson, and the Whigs saw its re-establishment as essential to reversing the economic turmoil of the late 1830s.

Tyler, however, viewed the bill as unconstitutional. In his veto message to the Senate, he argued that the proposed bank infringed on states' rights by allowing the federal government to override state objections to hosting branch banks. He cited his long-standing opposition to centralized banking power, which he had expressed consistently over his 25-year political career.

Whig Fury and the White House Riot

Tyler's veto enraged Whig lawmakers, who had expected him to support the bill. The congressional gallery erupted in hissing when the veto was announced. But the real fury came two days later, on August 18, when two separate mobs descended on the White House.

The first crowd fired guns into the air and shouted "Down with the veto!" Hours later, a second group arrived with a scarecrow-like effigy of Tyler, which they hanged and set ablaze in front of the Executive Mansion. Stones were hurled at the residence, and the President's family - living inside without formal security - feared for their safety.

In a separate incident, a painter threw rocks at Tyler while he walked the White House grounds. Though the man was arrested, Tyler declined to press charges.

The violence shocked Washington and prompted Congress to expand the District of Columbia's night patrols in 1842, laying the groundwork for a more formal security presence around the White House.

Political Fallout: Tyler Expelled from His Own Party

The riot was just the beginning of Tyler's estrangement from the Whigs. Henry Clay refused to compromise on the bank bill, and Tyler's veto hardened his resolve to oppose Clay's economic agenda. Soon after, Representative John Minor Botts - a former ally - publicly insulted Tyler's honor, deepening the rift.

In retaliation, the Whigs formally expelled Tyler from the party while he was still in office. His Cabinet resigned en masse, with the exception of Secretary of State Daniel Webster, who remained until 1842.

Tyler's presidency became increasingly isolated. Though he continued to assert his constitutional authority, his legislative agenda stalled, and he struggled to build coalitions. Critics mocked him as "His Accidency," questioning the legitimacy of his succession.

Legacy of the Veto

Tyler's veto of the bank bill and the ensuing riot remain one of the most dramatic episodes in White House history. It was the first time a president faced violent protest from his own party, and it underscored the volatility of American politics in the antebellum era.

The Second Bank of the United States was never revived. Tyler's veto effectively ended the Whigs' hopes of restoring centralized banking, and the U.S. would not see another national bank until the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.

Tyler's defiance also set a precedent for presidential independence. Despite pressure from party leaders and Cabinet members, he insisted that the executive branch was not beholden to congressional majorities. His stance helped shape the modern understanding of presidential veto power and succession.