[
Note: This is a review/summary I wrote in November of 1996 after reading the Roseboom book. This book is what got me interested in U.S. election history. This portion of the tale goes up to the election of 1852, which marked the end of the Whig Party.]
I found this book in the public library after my interest in the history of political parties in the U.S. was piqued by questions my kids asked me during the recent campaign. The participation of Ross Perot's Reform Party in the election led to questions about how the parties were formed and what their history was all about.
This book is ideal for this purpose. It starts with the first election in 1788 and follows though each succeeding election, up until the New Hampshire primary in 1964.
The Constitution says nothing about political parties, and apparently their existence was not even contemplated. However, during Washington's two terms in office the Congress split into two factions--federalist and anti-federalist. The federalists tended to be in New England, and represented the propertied classes, while the anti-federalists tended to be the rural, western, and southern people.
In the early elections each elector voted for two persons, with the highest becoming president and the second-highest receiving the VP as a consolation prize. Washington was named on every ballot in both 1788 and 1792. His VP, John Adams, was less popular, as he was generally perceived as being too aristocratic and mistrustful of the majority. The 1792 campaign saw a spirited race for the vice-presidency, with Adams barely outpolling Governor Clinton of New York, 77-50.
After Washington declined to run for a third term in 1796, there was a spirited battle between Adams and Thomas Jefferson, with party lines being clearly drawn between the federalist Adams and the anti-federalist Jefferson. Adams was denounced as a monarchist, and Jefferson as an atheist. With the state legislatures choosing the electors in ten of the sixteen states, there was much politicking, with Adams barely edging out Jefferson, 71-68.
Adams was a weak president, beset with problems. The election of 1800 saw him and Jefferson again compete in the electoral college, with Jefferson winning this time 73-65. However, it was not that simple. The actual vote had Jefferson and his running mate, Aaron Burr, tied at 73 each, since the electors were still casting two votes and party discipline had reached 100%.
The tie vote threw the election into the House of Representatives, which was still controlled by the federalists as it was the old, lame-duck House making the decision, rather than the newly-elected House. The federalists tried to elect Burr, figuring he was the least objectionable of the two anti-federalists who had tied, and they almost accomplished this. Even though Burr wouldn't lift a finger to help them, the House went through ballot after ballot with the states divided eight to six for Jefferson, with two states evenly split. Burr needed a change of only three votes to be elected, but he refused to act. Finally, the sole representative from Delaware switched his vote to Jefferson to avoid a constitutional crisis, and the deadlock was broken on the 36th ballot.
After this the federalists soon became so irrelevant and split into factions that the party lost its status as a major party. Jefferson's first term was marked by peace, prosperity, and the acquisition of the Louisiana Purchase. The federalists could not come up with any good issues, and their scheme for New England to secede from the union failed.
After Jefferson won re-election in 1804 with 162 electoral votes to 14 for Charles Pinckney of South Carolina, Roseboom comments that "federalism was almost extinct". Jefferson is referred to as "the master political architect of his day, and few have equalled him". He "laid the foundation on which American liberalism was to build", and he "demonstrated the falsity of the federalist dogma that the propertied few alone were fit to govern and that democracy meant mob rule".
James Madison had long been regarded as the logical successor to Jefferson, and in 1808 he was elected 122-47 over Pinckney. However, Madison was a weak president and federalism rose again, helped by the war between Britain and France and the seemingly unavoidable involvement of the U.S. in the conflict.
Madison was re-elected in 1812 by only 128 to Clinton's 89. He won the west and the south, but needed Pennsylvania's 25 votes to win the election. The war clouds were ever-present, and Roseboom says that Secretary of State James Monroe was "the only first-rate man in the cabinet".
Secession talk in New England was strong during the first two years of Madison's second term, but with the victory of Andrew Jackson at New Orleans in January of 1815, the ship of state was stable again. The author states that "for federalism the peace was the end of everything. The dire predictions of the collapse of the government and the end of the union suddenly seemed ridiculous...The final two years of Madison's presidency were peaceful and untroubled."
The contest in 1816 was for the Republican nomination, rather than between the two parties. Monroe barely won over Crawford of Georgia, 65-54. The federalists nominated noone, although the electors cast 34 votes for Rufus King.
Monroe chose his cabinet wisely, reaching out to the federalists and bringing in John Quincy Adams of New England as Secretary of State. He presided over a united country, making many friends and creating good will by touring the west and north; as a result of his efforts, the Monroe administration was dubbed "The Era of Good feelings". Consequently, Monroe was re-elected in 1820 without opposition.
The political landscape changed dramatically by 1824, however. Sectionalism raised its ugly head, and "New England, the middle states, the old South, and the Mississippi Valley West were beginning to pull in different directions over protective tariffs, internal improvements, and public lands". The result was "a galaxy of candidates almost without parallel in presidential elections before or since".
Much politicking and deal-making was going on, enhanced by the fact that some states still chose their electors in the state legislatures. Andrew Jackson led John Quincy Adams in the electoral vote, 99-84, but with neither candidate having an Electoral College majority, the House of Representatives was tasked with deciding the election.
Henry Clay happened to be sitting next to Adams at a New Year's Day function, and this facilitated their direct dealing resulting in Clay's support. It was later published anonymously that Clay had been offered the Secretary of State job in exchange for his support. Clay vehemently denied this charge, and he even went so far as to challenge the writer to a duel.
Clay was later made Secretary of State, adding to the appearance of deal-making. It must be asked, though, if this was so wrong in that situation. If the House of Representatives is to decide the result of a presidential election, it seems obvious that a considerable amount of political maneuvering and quid pro quo pacts could ensue. In the 1824 election, Roseboom is certain that Clay would never have supported Jackson anyway.
Another quid pro quo example in 1824 was the lone Missouri congressman, who was concerned about the fate of his brother, who had killed a man in a duel. Apparently Adams was able to reassure him sufficiently to gain his support.
The deciding vote for Adams came when an undecided New York congressman decided at the last minute to support Adams. What happened was that he knelt down on the floor of the House to pray about his decision, and when he opened his eyes a paper with Adams' name on it was lying on the floor in front of him. He took this as a sign from God, and his vote gave Adams his 13th out of the 24 states.
John Quincy Adams was probably the unhappiest president in our history. As Roseboom puts it:
"For John Quincy Adams, the presidency brought only burdens and disappointments, bitterness and sleepless nights. His title was tarnished by charges of corruption, and he was acutely conscious of a lack of public confidence, which his morbid, suspicious, sensitive nature exaggerated because he had not been chosen by the electoral college...In Congress, every administration measure had to face a battery of political criticisms."
The result was that in 1828 Jackson won over Adams 178 to 83, with Adams' strength limited to the Northeast. In this election the opposing groups had no official names; both groups were Republicans and were called Adams men or Jackson men, or administration and opposition. Around 1830 the term "National Republican" began to be used for the Clay followers, and "Democratic Republican" for the Jackson group. Gradually after 1832 the name for the Jackson supporters was shortened to "Democratic".
1832 saw the appearance of the national convention for the first time (except for an earlier Antimason Party convention). Both of the parties had their conventions in Baltimore, with the Republicans nominating Clay, and the Democrats nominating Jackson for a second term. The main issue for the Democrats was picking their VP candidate, as Jackson and his first-term VP, John Calhoun, were estranged. The convention settled on Martin Van Buren of New York, and the Jackson-Van Buren ticket won the general election handily over Clay, 219-49. The development of the national convention system signalled the intrusion of party politics into the national government in a major way.
Jackson's second term saw a number of major controversies: South Carolina's attempt to nullify the tariff, the United States Bank controversy caused by Jackson's removing government deposits from the bank, and what to do with the proceeds from land sales, which were substantial during this era. The various battles produced significant opposition to Jackson's strong stands on these issues, and the Whig party was born.
The author refers to the Whig party as having "a coat of many colors", since it consisted of different factions depending on the part of the country. The name "Whig" was used because its advocates likened themselves to the British Whigs who had resisted royal desposition. Similarly in the U.S., the opposition to the autocratic Andrew Jackson fueled the formation of the new Whig party.
In the election of 1836, the Whigs held no national convention, leaving each state free to support local favorites. Outgoing President Jackson strongly supported his VP, Martin Van Buren, who received 170 electoral votes to a total of 124 for an array of four Whig candidates, led by 73 for William Henry Harrison. The Democratic VP candidate, Richard Johnson, received one less electoral vote than needed for election and so the Senate chose the VP for the only time in history, with Johnson winning there 33 to 16.
Van Buren lacked Jackson's stature and personal magnetism, but his actions during his term were sensible. He was faced with a depression, which accelerated the growth of the new labor movement. His proposal for an independent treasury finally won approval when Calhoun decided to support it late in the term.
Van Buren was unanimously nominated for a second term at the 1840 Democratic convention. This time the Whigs did hold a national convention, which took place in December of 1839 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. At the convention Clay was ahead on the first ballot, and he seemed to be the logical candidate. However, Whig leaders in the key states of New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio did not favor him; they wanted "a commoner, preferably one without a long public career to defend." They therefore turned to a war hero, General William Henry Harrison, who had no political record to defend and whose age, 67, was his only liability.
Those who complain about the length and tenor of campaigns today should look at the campaign of 1840, and today's wouldn't look so bad by comparison. That political parties in this country exist for reasons of expediency rather than principle is illustrated by the fact that the Whigs didn't even bother to adopt a platform. They knew it would be impossible to agree on a platform, since the party now consisted of an amalgamation of different interests, much like the Democratic party after the second world war, with its support from such disparate groups as the South, labor unions, and civil rights advocates,
Clay was deeply disappointed and angry over the loss of the nomination he felt he was entitled to, and he refused to suggest a VP running mate. Nevertheless, the convention chose a Clay supporter, John Tyler, to balance the ticket. The conservatives from the North knew Clay could not be elected, and someone perceived as a "commoner" was needed to appeal to the democratic masses. Hence Harrison was sold as "a simple man of the frontier", glossing over his aristocratic Virginia ancestry.
The author reports that "crowds of unheard-of proportions turned out for Whig rallies. Ten acres of people were reported present at a Dayton, Ohio jamboree." Harrison avoided the issues and "talked in crowd-pleasing generalities". The log-cabin theme was consistently stressed throughout the campaign. In the South a different approach was taken, with Harrison being sold as a strong states' rights candidate, one who would not cause trouble on the slavery issue.
The result was that Harrison won big, with Van Buren getting only 60 electoral votes out of 194. The author points out the irony here:
"One of the most sincerely democratic of presidents was overborn by a wave of popular enthusiasm for a log-cabin myth. Marching in the Whig ranks with simple artisans and rustic cultivators were bankers, merchants, landed gentry, mill owners and speculators--for the log-cabin cult, spreading through the land, had made strange bedfellows. The rich and the well born had at last learned that in politics the vote of the humble were not to be despised."
Harrison died of pneumonia a month after his inauguration, and Tyler took over. Clay had assumed the leadership in Congress, but he and Tyler began feuding, as result of both personality differences and policy differences. Tyler angered Whig Congressional leaders by vetoing a bill to charter another U.S. bank. The basic problem was that the Whig party contained disparate elements, and Tyler was a states-rights Southerner, while Clay represented the ideas of the old National Republicans, who were the majority element in the Whig alliance. The whole cabinet resigned, and the Whig caucus denounced Tyler.
The fourth Democratic convention met in Baltimore in May of 1844. Van Buren had the majority of delegates pledged to him, but a proposed treaty to annex Texas had been sent to the Senate the month before, and candidates were obliged to comment on it. Van Buren declared against annexation, which caused his downfall. He still got a majority of delegates on the first ballot, but the convention had voted to require a two-thirds majority, unlike the previous convention.
Former Tennessee governor James K. Polk was eventually nominated on the ninth ballot, becoming the first dark-horse nominee of a major party. Jackson made the difference when he threw his support from Van Buren to Polk, after being distressed over Van Buren's opposition to annexing Texas. To conciliate the Van Buren following, the VP nomination was given to New York senator Silas Wright; however, Wright telegraphed his refusal, and the delegates then named George Dallas of Pennsylvania. The Democratic platform called for "the re-occupation of Oregon and the re-annexation of Texas at the earliest practicable period", a shrewd bid for expansionist support in both the North and the South.
The Whigs nominated Clay unopposed. In the wake of the defeat of his Texas treaty, Tyler withdrew from consideration and threw his support in the general election to Polk. The Whig platform did not mention Texas or the United States Bank, the two most controversial issues of the day.
Clay had seem poised to win the presidency, but it was not to be. The growth of the anti-slavery Liberty Party in the North took crucial votes from him in New York, a state he needed to win. He might have won New York based on his original pronouncement against the Texas annexation, but he later wavered on this, and this vacillation hurt him in the North. However, Roseboom points out that Clay won Tennessee by only 113 votes, and had he not wavered on the Texas issue he probably would have lost Tennessee, and defeat in Tennessee would have cost him the election, even had he won New York. In the popular vote, Polk won about 49 and a half per cent, to Clay's 48%, with the Liberty Party winning the rest, a kind o9f result we've seen in recent years (including 1996), when third-party candidates deny a majority to the winner.
The 1844 campaign contained much slander and mud-slinging. Clay was branded a gambler, a duelist, a profane swearer, and a corrupt bargainer. Polk's character was exemplary, but a false story was spread about a gang of slaves taken to a slave auction branded with the letters "JKP".
Polk, like Van Buren, did a decent job as president, but lacked the personal leadership qualities necessary. The author states:
"Polk as president displayed marked executive ability and an unexpected determination to direct his own administration. Addicted to grinding labor, methodical, careful of detail, patient with others, he gave himself unsparingly to his position. Yet he had serious defects as a party leader. He was drab, rather suspicious, self-contained, self-righteous, always on his guard, trusting no one overmuch and inviting no confidences."
Polk's main problems were over patronage. He did not bring in the different elements to serve in his cabinet, and did not consult with others in making his choices. He ended his term amazingly unpopular.
In 1848 the Democrats nominated Michigan Senator Lewis Cass for president on the fourth ballot. The platform defended the Mexican War and praised the Polk administration. Yet, Roseboom states that "not half a dozen delegates would have voted to renominate Polk".
The Whigs nominated General Zachary Taylor on the fourth ballot. Clay was a close second, 111-97, on the fist ballot, but fell off on subsequent ballots. To avoid sectional discord, there was no platform.
The slavery issue divided both of the major parties, and caused the emergence of several third parties. Van Buren ran on the "Barnburner" ticket, and received about 10% of the vote, to Taylor's 47% and Cass's 42%. Taylor won the electoral vote 163-127.
After Taylor's inauguration, Clay began putting together a set of compromise proposals to settle the sectional issues. Taylor was opposed to the proposals, but then exposed himself to the hot sun on the 4th of July, and died five days later. Millard Fillmore took over, and supported the Clay proposals.
The compromise struggles split both parties, but hurt the Whigs the most. The Whig platform in 1852 gave lukewarm approval to the compromise measures, and made concessions to the South. The first ballot saw Fillmore leading General Winfield Scott 133-131, with 29 for Webster. The general was finally nominated on the 53rd ballot, when the Webster and Fillmore forces could not agree sufficiently. Fillmore would have withdrawn in favor of Webster, but he could not deliver all of his supporters.
The Democrats had a large field of candidates and a diversity of views. With the two-thirds rule in effect, a real dark horse, Franklin Pierce, was finally nominated on the 49th ballot by the weary delegates.
The author calls the 1852 campaign "one of the dullest in American history". It was issueless and degenerated into name calling and personal attacks. The Democrats won in a landslide, with Pierce getting over 50% of the vote despite the usual third-party candidate muddying the waters. The electoral vote was 254-42.
The demoralized Whig Party was now on its last legs. The author analyzes the reasons:
"With its most available candidate, the party had suffered its worst defeat. Clay's compromise had saved the Union but wrecked the party whose foundation he had laid twenty years before. It might have passed away in any case. The growing moral sentiment against slavery, nurtured in Protestant churches, was stirring the middle classes, the backbone of Whiggery. The party was splitting apart in the North. In New England, there were Cotton and Conscience Whigs; in New York, Woolly Heads and Silver Grays; in other places, 'higher law' and 'lower law' Whigs. The conservatives who sought to repair the breach between the sections were pale reflections of Clay and Webster: Fillmore, Everett, Bell, Crittenden, all were thin-blooded elder statesmen. The task required dynamic leadership, and this they lacked. Whiggery had gone to seed."
[Note: I pause here, 40% of the way into the narrative. In typing the account of the demise of the Whig Party, it strikes me how similar the state of the Whig Party in 1852 is to the state of the Republican Party in 2024. Like the Whig Party, the Republicans have stopped adopting platforms. Which is to say, they no longer stand for anything. Three of the four Whig presidential candidates were "war heroes" with no prior experience in government. Similarly, the GOP now relies on a businessman who had no prior governmental experience prior to his 2016 presidential run. Trump's followers have been termed a "cult", and Roseboom uses this word in describing the followers of William Henry Harrison in 1940. The problem with this is that once the idols disappear, so does the party. It follows that today's Republican Party, like the Whig Party in 1852, has "gone to seed".]
