A School History of the United States

by John Bach McMaster

CHAPTER XXIII

POLITICS FROM 1824 TO 1845

%325. New Political Institutions.%—Of the political leaders of Washington's time few were left in 1825. The men who then conducted affairs had almost all been born since the Revolution, or were children at the time.[1] The same is true of the mass of the people. They too had been born since the Revolution, and, growing up under different conditions, held ideas very different from the men who went before them. They were more democratic and much less aristocratic, more humane, more practical. They abolished the old and cruel punishments, such as branding the cheeks and foreheads of criminals with letters, cutting off their ears, putting them in the pillory and the stocks; they partly abolished imprisonment for debt; they established free schools, reformatories, asylums, and penitentiaries. They amended their state constitutions or made new ones, and extended the right to vote, and introduced new political institutions, some of which were of doubtful value, but are still used.

[Footnote 1: John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson were born in 1767; Henry Clay, in 1777; John C. Calhoun, Daniel Webster, Martin Van Buren, and Thomas H. Benton, in 1782.]

%326. Political Proscription; the Gerrymander.%—One of these was the custom of turning men out of public office because they did not belong to the party in power, or did not "work" for the election of the successful candidate. As early as 1792 this vicious practice was in use in Pennsylvania, and a few years later was introduced in New York by De Witt Clinton. Jefferson resorted to it when he became President, but it was not till 1820 that it was firmly established by Congress. In that year William H. Crawford, who was Secretary of the Treasury and a presidential candidate, secured the passage of a "tenure of office" act, limiting the term of collectors of revenue, and a host of other officials, to four years, and thus made the appointments to these places rewards for political service.

Another institution dating from this time is the gerrymander. In 1812, when Elbridge Gerry was the Republican governor of Massachusetts, his party, finding that at the next election they would lose the governorship and the House of Representatives, decided to hold the Senate by marking out new senatorial districts. In doing this they drew the lines in such wise that districts where there were large Federalist majorities were cut in two, and the parts annexed to other districts, where there were yet larger Republican majorities.

[Illustration]

The story is told that a map of the Essex senatorial district was hanging on the office wall of the editor of the Columbian Centinel, when a famous artist named Stuart entered. Struck by the peculiar outline of the towns forming the district, he added a head, wings, and claws with his pencil, and turning to the editor, said: "There, that will do for a salamander." "Better say a Gerrymander," returned the editor, alluding to Elbridge Gerry, the Republican governor who had signed the districting act. However this may be, it is certain that the name "gerrymander" was applied to the odious law in the columns of the Centinel, that it came rapidly into use, and has remained in our political nomenclature ever since. Indeed, a huge cut of the monster was prepared, and the next year was scattered as a broadside over the commonwealth, and so aroused the people that in the spring of 1813, despite the gerrymander, the Federalists recovered control of the Senate, and repealed the law. But the example was set, and was quickly imitated in New Jersey, New York, and Maryland. This established the institution, and it has been used over and over again to this day.

%327. The Third-term Tradition.%—Another political custom which had grown to have the force of law was that of never electing a President to three terms. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent a President serving any number of terms; but, as we have seen, when Washington finished his second he declined another, and when Jefferson (in 1807-1808) was asked by the legislatures of several states to accept a third term, he declined, and very seriously advised the people never to elect any man President more than twice.[1] The example so set was followed by Madison and Monroe and had thus by 1824 become an established usage.

[Footnote 1: McMaster's With the Fathers, pp. 64-70.]

%328. New Political Issues.%—The most important change of all was the rise of new political issues. We have seen how the financial questions which divided the people in 1790-1792 and gave rise to the Federalist and Republican parties, were replaced during the wars between England and France by the question, "Shall the United States be neutral?" It was not until the end of our second war with Great Britain that we were again free to attend to our home affairs.

During the long embargo and the war, manufactures had arisen, and one question now became, "Shall home manufactures be encouraged?" With the rapid settlement of the Mississippi valley and the demand for roads, canals, and river improvements by which trade might be carried on with the West, there arose a second political question: "Shall these internal improvements be made at government expense?"

Now the people of the different sections of the country were not of one mind on these questions. The Middle States and Kentucky and some parts of New England wanted manufactures encouraged. In the West and the Middle States people were in favor of internal improvements at the cost of the government. In the South Atlantic States, where tobacco and cotton and rice were raised and shipped (especially the cotton) to England, people cared nothing for manufactures, nothing for internal improvements.

%329. Presidential Candidates in 1824.%—This diversity of opinion on questions of vital importance had much to do with the breaking up of the Republican party into sectional factions after 1820. The ambition of leaders in these sections helped on the disruption, so that between 1821 and 1824 four men, John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts, Henry Clay of Kentucky, Andrew Jackson of Tennessee, John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, were nominated for President by state legislatures or state nominating conventions, by mass meeting or by gatherings of men who had assembled for other purposes but seized the occasion to indorse or propose a candidate. A fifth, William H. Crawford, was nominated by the congressional caucus, which then acted for the last time in our history.

Before election day this list was reduced to four: Calhoun had become the candidate of all factions for the vice presidency.

[Illustration: John Quincy Adams]

%330. Adams elected by the House of Representatives.%—The Constitution provides that no man is chosen President by the electors who does not receive a majority of their votes. In 1824 Jackson received ninety-nine; Adams, eighty-four; Crawford, forty-one; and Clay, thirty-seven. There was, therefore, no election, and it became the duty of the House of Representatives to make a choice. But according to the Constitution only the three highest could come before the House. This left out Clay, who was Speaker and who had great influence. His friends would not vote for Jackson on any account, nor for Crawford, the caucus candidate. Adams they liked, because he believed in internal improvements at government expense and a protective tariff. Adams accordingly was elected President. Calhoun had been elected Vice President by the electoral college.

[Illustration: The United States July 4, 1826]

The election of John Quincy Adams was a matter of intense disappointment to the friends of Jackson. In the heat of party passion and the bitterness of their disappointment they declared that it was the result of a bargain between Adams and Clay. Clay, they said, was to induce his friends in the House of Representatives to vote for Adams, in return for which Adams was to make Clay Secretary of State. No such bargain was ever made. But when Adams did appoint Clay Secretary of State, Jackson and his followers were fully convinced of the contrary[1].

[Footnote 1: Parton's Life of Jackson, Chap. 10; Schurz's Life of
Clay, Vol. I., pp. 203-258]

As a consequence, the legislature of Tennessee at once renominated Jackson for the presidency, and he became the people's candidate and drew about him not only the men who voted for him in 1824, but those also who had voted for Crawford, who was paralyzed and no longer a candidate. They called themselves "Jackson men," or Democratic Republicans.

Adams, it was known, would be nominated to succeed himself, and about him gathered all who wanted a tariff for protection, roads and canals at national expense, and a distribution among the states of the money obtained from the sale of public lands. These were the "Adams men," or National Republicans.

%331. Antimasons.%—But there was a third party which arose in a very curious way and soon became powerful. In 1826, at Batavia in New York, a freemason named William Morgan announced his intention to publish a book revealing the secrets of masonry; but about the time the book was to come out Morgan disappeared and was never seen again. This led to the belief that the masons had killed him, and stirred up great excitement all over the twelve western counties of New York. The "antimasons" said that a man who was a freemason considered his duty to his order superior to his duty to his country; and a determined effort was made to prevent the election of any freemason to office.

[Illustration: Andrew Jackson ]

At first the "antimasonic" movement was confined to western New York, but the moment it took a political turn it spread across northern Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, and Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and was led by some of the most distinguished men and aspiring politicians of the time[1].

[Footnote 1: Stanwood's Presidential Elections, Chap. 18]

%332. The Election of Jackson.%—When the presidential election occurred in 1828, there were thus three parties,—the "Jackson men," the "Administration," and the Antimasonic. But politics had very little to do with the result. In the early days of the republic, the mass of men were ignorant and uneducated, and willingly submitted to be led by men of education and what was called breeding. From Washington down to John Quincy Adams, the presidents were from the aristocratic class. They were not men of the people. But in course of time a great change had come over the mass of Americans. Their prosperity, their energy in developing the country, had made them self-reliant, and impatient of all claims of superiority. One man was now no better than another, and the cry arose all over the country for a President who was "a man of the people." Jackson was just such a man, and it was because he was "a man of the people" that he was elected. Of 261 electoral votes he received 178, and Adams 83.

%333. The North and the South Two Different Peoples.%—Before entering on Jackson's administration, it is necessary to call attention to the effect produced on our country by the industrial revolution discussed in Chaps. 19 and 22. In the first place, it produced two distinct and utterly different peoples: the one in the North and the other in the South. In the North, where there were no great plantations, no great farms, and where the labor was free, the marvelous inventions, discoveries, and improvements mentioned were eagerly seized on and used. There cities grew up, manufactures nourished, canals were dug, railroads were built, and industries of every sort established. Some towns, as Lynn, Lowell, Lawrence, Fall River, Cohoes, Paterson, Newark, and Pittsburg, were almost entirely given up to mills and factories. No such towns existed in the South. In the South men lived on plantations, raised cotton, tobacco, and rice, owned slaves, built few large towns, cared nothing for internal improvements, and established no industries of any sort.

This difference of occupation led of course to difference of interests and opinions, so that on three matters—the extension of slavery, internal improvements, and tariff for protection—the North and the South were opposed to each other. In the West and the Middle States these questions were all-important, and by a union of the two sections under the leadership of Clay a new tariff was passed in 1824, and in the course of the next four years $2,300,000 were voted for internal improvements.

The Virginia legislature (1825) protested against internal improvements at government expense and against the tariff. But the North demanded more, and in 1827 another tariff bill was prevented from passing only by the casting vote of Vice President Calhoun. And now the two sections joined issue. The South, in memorials, resolutions, and protests, declared a tariff for protection to be unconstitutional, partial, and oppressive. The wool growers and manufacturers of the North called a national convention of protectionists to meet at Harrisburg, and when Congress met, forced through the tariff of 1828. The South answered with anti-tariff meetings, addresses, resolutions, with boycotts on the tariff states, and with protests from the legislatures. Calhoun then came forward as the leader of the movement and put forth an argument, known as the South Carolina Exposition, in which he urged that a convention should meet in South Carolina and decide in what manner the tariff acts should "be declared null and void within the limits of the state."

%334. May a State nullify an Act of Congress?%—The right of a state to nullify an act of Congress thus became the question of the hour, and was again set forth yet more fully by Calhoun in 1831. That the South was deeply in earnest was apparent, and in 1832 Congress changed the tariff of 1828, and made it less objectionable. But it was against tariff for protection, not against any particular tariff, that South Carolina contended, and finding that the North would not give up its principles, she put her threat into execution. The legislature called a state convention, which declared that the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were null and void and without force in South Carolina, and forbade anybody to pay the duties laid by these laws after February 1, 1833.[1]

[Footnote 1: Houston's A Critical Study of Nullification in South
Carolina; Parton's Jackson, Vol. III., Chaps. 32-34; Schurz's Life
of Clay, Vol. II., Chap. 14; Von Holst's Life of Calhoun, Chap. 4;
Lodge's Life of Webster, Chaps. 6, 7; Rhodes's History of the United
States, Vol. I., pp. 40-50.]

Jackson, who had just been reëlected, was not terrified. He bade the collector at Charleston go on and collect the revenue duties, and use force if necessary, and he issued a long address to the Nullifiers. On the one hand, he urged them to yield. On the other, he told them that "the laws of the United States must be executed…. Those who told you that you might peacefully prevent their execution deceived you…. Their object is disunion, and disunion by armed force is treason."

%335. Webster's Great Reply to Calhoun.%—Calhoun, who since 1825 had been Vice President of the United States, now resigned, and was at once made senator from South Carolina. When Congress met in December, 1832, the great question before it was what to do with South Carolina. Jackson wanted a "Force Act," that is, an act giving him power to collect the tariff duties by force of arms. Hayne, who was now governor of South Carolina, declared that if this was done, his state would leave the Union.

A great debate occurred on the Force Act, in which Calhoun, speaking for the South, asserted the right of a state to nullify and secede from the Union, while Webster, speaking for the North, denied the right of nullification and secession, and upheld the Union and the Constitution.[1]

[Footnote 1: Johnston's American Orations, Vol. I., pp. 196-212; Webster's Works, Vol. III., pp. 248-355, 448-505; Rhodes's History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 50-52.]

%336. The Compromise of 1833%.—Meantime, Henry Clay, seeing how determined each side was, and fearing civil war might follow, came forward with a compromise. He proposed that the tariff of 1832 should be reduced gradually till July, 1842, when on all articles imported there should be a duty equal to twenty per cent of their value. This was passed, and the Compromise Tariff, as it is called, became a law in March, 1833. A new convention in South Carolina then repealed the ordinance of nullification.

%337. War on the Bank of the United States%.—While South Carolina was thus fighting internal improvements and the tariff, the whole Jackson party was fighting the Bank of the United States. You will remember that this institution was chartered by Congress in 1816; and its charter was to run till 1836. Among the rights given it was that of having branches in as many cities in the country as it pleased, and, exercising this right, it speedily established branches in the chief cities of the South and West. The South and West were already full of state banks, and, knowing that the business of these would be injured if the branches of the United States Bank were allowed to come among them, the people of that region resented the reëstablishment of a national bank. Jackson, as a Western man, shared in this hatred, and when he became President was easily persuaded by his friends (who wished to force the Bank to take sides in politics) to attack it. The charter had still nearly eight years to run; nevertheless, in his first message to Congress (December, 1829) he denounced the Bank as unconstitutional, unnecessary, and as having failed to give the country a sound currency, and suggested that it should not be rechartered. Congress paid little attention to him. But he kept on, year after year, till, in 1832, the friends of the Bank made his attack a political issue[1].

[Footnote 1: Roosevelt's Life of Benton, Chap. 6; Parton's Life of
Jackson, Vol. III., Chaps. 29-31; Tyler's Memoir of Roger B. Taney,
Vol. I., Chap. 3; Von Hoist's Constitutional History, Vol. II., pp.
31-52; Schurz's Clay, Vol. L, Chap. 13; American History
Leaflets, No. 24]

%338. The First National Nominating Convention; the First Party Platform.%—To do this was easy, because in 1832 it was well known that Jackson would again be a candidate for the presidency. Now the presidential contest of that year is remarkable for two reasons:

1. Because each of the three parties held a national convention for the nomination of candidates.

2. Because a party platform was then used for the first time.

The originators of the national convention were the Antimasons. State conventions of delegates to nominate state officers, such as governors and congressmen and presidential electors, had long been in use. But never, till September, 1831, had there been a convention of delegates from all parts of the country for the purpose of nominating the President and Vice President. In that year Antimasonic delegates from twenty-two states met at Baltimore and nominated William Wirt and Amos Ellmaker.

The example thus set was quickly followed, for in December, 1831, a convention of National Republicans nominated Henry Clay. In May, 1832, a national convention of Democrats nominated Martin Van Buren for Vice President[1]; and in that same month, a "national assembly of young men," or, as the Democrats called it, "Clay's Infant School," met at Washington and framed the first party platform. They were friends of Clay, and in their platform they demanded protection to American industries, and internal improvements at government expense, and denounced Jackson for his many removals from office. They next issued an address to the people, in which they declared that if Jackson were reëlected, the Bank would "be abolished." [2]

[Footnote 1: It was not necessary to nominate Jackson. That he should be re-elected was the wish of the great body of voters. The convention, therefore, merely nominated a Vice President]

[Footnote 2: For party platform see McKee's National Platforms of all
Parties.]

%339. Jackson destroys the Bank.%—The friends of the Bank meantime appealed to Congress for a new charter and found little difficulty in getting it. But when the bill went to Jackson for his signature, he vetoed it, and, as its friends had not enough votes to pass the bill over the veto, the Bank was not rechartered.

The only hope left was to defeat Jackson at the polls. But this too was a failure, for he was reëlected by greater majorities than he had received in 1828.[1]

[Footnote 1: Of the 288 electoral votes, Jackson received 219, and Clay 49. Wirt, the Antimason, secured 7.]

%340. Jackson withdraws the Government Money from the Bank.%—This signal triumph was understood by Jackson to mean that the people approved of his treatment of the Bank. So he continued to hurt it all he could, and in 1833 ordered his Secretary of the Treasury to remove the money of the United States from the Bank and its branches. This the Secretary[1] refused to do; whereupon Jackson removed him and put another,[2] who would, in his place. After 1833, therefore, the collectors of United States revenue ceased to deposit it in the Bank of the United States, and put it in state banks ("pet banks") named by the Secretary of the Treasury. The money already on deposit was gradually drawn out, till none remained.[3]

[Footnote 1: William J. Duane. ]

[Footnote 2: Roger B. Taney. ]

[Footnote 3: Parton's Jackson, Vol. III., Chaps. 36-39; American
History Leaflets, No. 24; Sumner's Jackson, Chaps. 13, 14; Von
Hoist's Constitutional History, Vol. II., pp. 52-79; Roosevelt's
Benton, Chap. 6. ]

For this act the Senate, when it met in December, 1833, passed a vote of censure on Jackson and entered the censure on its journal. Jackson protested, and asked to have his protest entered, but the Senate refused. Whereupon Benton of Missouri declared that he would not rest till the censure was removed or "expunged" from the journal. At first this did not seem likely to occur. But Benton kept at it, and at last, in 1837, the Senate having become Democratic, he succeeded[1].

[Footnote 1: When the resolution had passed, the Clerk of the Senate was ordered to bring in the journal, draw a thick black line around the censure, and write across it "Expunged by order of the Senate, January 16, 1837.">[

%341. Wildcat State Banks.%—As soon as the reëlection of Jackson made it certain that the charter of the Bank of the United States would not be renewed, the same thing happened in 1833 that had occurred in 1811. The legislature of every state was beset with applications for bank charters, and granted them. In 1832 there were but 288 state banks in the country. In 1836 there were 583. Some were established in order to get deposits of the government money. Others were started for the purpose of issuing paper money with which the bank officials might speculate. Others, of course, were founded with an honest purpose. But they all issued paper money, which the people borrowed on very poor security and used in speculation.

%342. The Period of Speculation.%—Never before had the opportunity for speculation been so great. The new way of doing business, the rise of corporations and manufactures, drew people into the cities, which grew in area and afforded a chance for investors to get rich by purchasing city lots and holding them for a rise in price. Railroads and canals were being projected all over the country. Another favorite way of speculating, therefore, was to buy land along the lines of railroads building or to be built. Suddenly cotton rose a few cents a pound, and thousands of people began to speculate in slaves and cotton land. Others bought land in the West from the government, at $1.25 an acre, and laid it out into town lots,[1] which they sold for $10 and $20 apiece to people in the East. In short, everybody who could was borrowing paper money from the banks and speculating.

[Footnote 1: Sometimes ten such lots would be laid out on an acre]

Under these conditions, any cause which should force the banks to stop loaning money, or to call in that already loaned, would bring on a panic. And this is just what happened.

%343. The Specie Circular.%—Speculation in government land was so general that the annual sales rose from $2,300,000 in 1831, to $24,900,000 in 1836.[2] Finding that these great purchases were paid for not in gold and silver, but in state bank paper money, Jackson became alarmed. Many of the banks were of doubtful soundness, and if they failed, all their money which the government had taken for land would be lost. In 1836, therefore, Jackson issued his "Specie Circular," which commanded all officials authorized to sell government land to receive payment in nothing but gold or silver or land scrip. A great demand for specie and a removal of it from the banks in the East to those in the West followed, which of course hurt the Eastern banks, because it took away some of their money, and that kind of money which they were holding for the purpose of redeeming their paper.

[Footnote 2: Shepard's Van Buren, Chap. 8; Sumner's Jackson, pp. 322-325]

Another thing which hurt the banks, by forcing them to stop loaning and to call for a settlement of debts, was the distribution of the surplus revenue among the states.

%344. The Surplus Revenue.%—What caused this surplus revenue? Many things.

1. The United States had no debt. The national debt, you remember, was created in 1790 by funding the foreign and Congress debt and assuming those of the states, and amounted to $75,000,000. When Jefferson was elected President in 1801, this debt had risen to $80,000,000; but during his administration it fell to $57,000,000. The war with England raised it to $127,000,000, after which it once more decreased year by year till 1835, when every dollar was paid off, and the United States was out of debt[1].

[Footnote 1: As bonds, etc., to the value of $35,000 were never presented for payment, the United States appears to have always been in debt. This $35,000 probably represents evidences of indebtedness lost by the owners]

2. The expenses of the government were not large.

3. There was a heavy importation of foreign goods, which produced a great revenue under the tariff act.

4. The immense speculation in government lands already described produced a large income to the government[1].

[Footnote 1: The land sales were $4,800,000 in 1834, $14,757,000 in 1835, and $24,877,000 in 1836]

In consequence of these causes, the government on June 1, 1836, had in the banks $41,500,000 more than it needed.

What to do with this useless money sorely puzzled Congress. It could not reduce the tariff, because that was gradually being reduced under the compromise of 1833. Some wanted the money derived from the sale of land distributed. But at last it was decided to take all the surplus the government had on January 1, 1837, subtract $5,000,000 from it, and divide the rest by the number of senators and representatives in Congress, and give each state as many parts as it had senators and representatives[1].

[Footnote 1: One state, New York, was to receive $4,000,000, three states over $2,000,000, six over $1,000,000, and eight over $500,000]

On January 1, 1837, the surplus was $42,468,000, which, after subtracting the $5,000,000, left $37,468,000 to be distributed. It was to be paid in four installments[1]; but only three of them were ever paid, for, when October 1, 1837, came, the whole country was suffering from a panic[2].

[Footnote 1: The days of payment were Jan. 1, April 1, July 1, and Oct. 1, 1837]

[Footnote 2: Bourne's History of the Surplus Revenue of 1837]

%345. The Panic of 1837.%—Now, when the banks in which the government surplus was kept were suddenly called on to give it up in order that it might be distributed among the states, (as they had loaned this surplus) they were all forced to call it in. More than that, they would make no new loans. This made credit hard to get. As a consequence, mills and factories shut down, all buying and selling stopped, and thousands of workmen were thrown out of employment. As everybody wanted money, it followed that houses, lands, property of every sort, was offered for sale at ridiculously low prices. But there were no buyers. In New York the distress was so great that bread riots occurred. The merchants, unable to pay their debts, began to fail, and to make matters worse the banks all over the country suspended specie payment; that is, refused to give gold and silver in exchange for their paper bills. Then the panic set in, and for a while the people, the states, and the government were bankrupt[1].

[Footnote 1: Shepard's Van Buren, Chap. 8.]

%346. Election of Martin Van Buren; Eighth President.%—In accordance with the well-established custom that no President shall have more than two terms, Jackson [Illustration: Martin Van Buren] would not accept a renomination in 1836. So the Democratic national convention nominated Martin Van Buren and R.M. Johnson. The Whigs, as the National Republicans called themselves after 1834, did not hold a national nominating convention, but agreed to support William Henry Harrison. Van Buren was elected, and inaugurated March. 4, 1837[1].

[Footnote 1: Ibid., Chap. 7.]

%347 The New National Debt; the Independent Treasury.%—But scarcely had he taken the oath of office when the panic swept over the country, and his whole term was one of financial distress or hard times. The suspension of specie payment and the failures of many banks and merchants left the government without money, and forced Van Buren to call an extra session of Congress in September, 1837. Before adjourning, Congress ordered the fourth or October installment of the distributed revenue to be suspended. It has never been given to the states. Congress also authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to issue $10,000,000 in treasury notes, and so laid the foundation for the second national debt, which one cause or another has continued ever since.

The experience the government had thus twice passed through (1814 and 1837) led the people to believe it ought not to keep its money in state banks. But just where the money should be kept was a disputed party question. The Whigs insisted on a third National Bank like the old one Jackson had destroyed. Van Buren wanted what was called an "Independent Treasury," and after four attempts the act establishing it was passed in 1840.

The law created four "receivers general" (one each at Boston, New York, Charleston, and St. Louis), to whom all money collected by the United States officials should be turned over, and directed that "rooms, vaults, and safes" should be provided for the safe keeping of the money.[1]

[Footnote 1: Shepard's Van Buren, Chap. 9.]

As might be expected, the people laid all the blame for the hard times on Van Buren and his party. The Democrats, they said, had destroyed the National Bank; they had then removed the United States money, and given it to "pet" state banks; they had then distributed the surplus, and by taking the surplus from the state banks had brought on the panic. Whether this was true or not, the people believed it, and were determined to "turn out little Van."

The campaign of 1840 was the most novel, exciting, and memorable that had yet taken place. Three parties had candidates in the field. The Antislavery party put forward James Gillespie Birney and Thomas Earle. The Democrats in their convention renominated Van Buren, but no Vice President. The Whigs nominated W.H. Harrison, and John Tyler of Virginia. The mention of the Antislavery party makes it necessary to account for its origin.

%348. The Antislavery Movement%.—The appearance of the Antislavery or Liberty party marks the beginning in national affairs of an antislavery movement which had long been going on in the states. When the Missouri Compromise was made in 1820, many people believed that the troublesome matter of slavery was settled. This was a mistake, and the compromise really made matters worse. In the first place, it encouraged the men in Illinois who favored slavery to attempt to make it a slave state by amending the state constitution, an attempt which failed in 1824 after a long struggle. In the second place, it aroused certain men who had been agitating for freeing the slaves to redoubled energy. Among these were Benjamin Lundy, James Gillespie Birney, and William Lloyd Garrison, who in 1831 established an abolition newspaper called the Liberator, which became very famous. In the third place, it led to the formation all over the North, and in many places in the South, of new abolition societies, and stirred up the old ones and made them more active.[1]

[Footnote 1: James G. Birney and his Times, Chap. 12.]

For a time these societies carried on their work, each independent of
the others. But in 1833, a convention of delegates from them met at
Philadelphia, and formed a national society called the American
Antislavery Society.[1]

[Footnote 1: Its constitution declared (1) that each state has exclusive right to regulate slavery within it; (2) that the society will endeavor to persuade Congress to stop the interstate slave trade, to abolish slavery in the territories and in the District of Columbia, and to admit no more slave states into the Union.]

%349. Antislavery Documents shut out of the Mails.%—Thus organized, the society went to work at once and flooded the South with newspapers, pamphlets, pictures, and handbills, all intended to arouse a sentiment for instant abolition or emancipation of slaves. The South declared that these were inflammatory, insurrectionary, and likely to incite the slaves to revolt, and called on the North to suppress abolition societies and stop the spread of abolition papers. To do such a thing by legal means was impossible; so an attempt was made to do it by illegal means. In the Northern cities such as Philadelphia, Utica, Boston, Haverhill, mobs broke up meetings of abolitionists, and dragged the leaders about the streets. In the South, the postmasters, as at Charleston, seized antislavery tracts and pamphlets going through the mails, and the people burned them. In New York city such matter was taken from the mails and destroyed by the postmaster. When these outrages were reported to Amos Kendall, the Postmaster-General, he approved of them; and when Congress met, Jackson asked for a law that would prohibit the circulation "in the Southern States, through the mails, of incendiary publications intended to instigate the slaves to insurrection." From the legislatures of five Southern states came resolutions calling on the people of the North to suppress the abolitionists.[1] Congress and the legislatures of New York and Rhode Island responded; but the bills introduced did not pass.[2]

[Footnote 1: South Carolina, North Carolina, Alabama, Virginia, and
Georgia.]

[Footnote 2: James G. Birney and his Times, pp. 184-194.]

This attempt having failed, the mobs again took up the work, and began to smash and destroy the presses of antislavery newspapers. One paper, twice treated in this manner in 1836, was the Philanthropist published at Cincinnati by James Gillespie Birney. Another was the Observer, published at Alton by Elijah Lovejoy, who was murdered in defending his property.[1] The Pennsylvania Freeman was a third.

[Footnote 1: Wilson's Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, Vol.
II., Chap. 27; James G. Birney and his Times, pp. 204-219, 241-255.]

%350. The Gag Rule%.—Not content with attacking the liberty of the press, the proslavery men attacked the right of petition. The Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people … to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Under this right the antislavery people had long been petitioning Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and the petitions had been received; but of course not granted. Now, in 1836, when John Quincy Adams presented one to the House of Representatives, a member moved that it be not received. A fierce debate followed, and out of it grew a rule which forbade any petition, resolution, or paper relating in any way to slavery, or the abolition of slavery, to be received. This famous "Gag Rule" was adopted by Congress after Congress until 1844.[1]

[Footnote 1: Morse's _Life of John Quincy Adams, _pp. 249-253, 306-308.]

%351. The Liberty Party formed%.—The effect of these extreme measures was greatly to increase the antislavery sentiment. But the men who held these sentiments were largely members of the Whig and Democratic parties. In the hope of drawing them from their parties, and inducing them to act together, the antislavery conventions about 1838 began to urge the formation of an antislavery party, which was finally accomplished at Albany, N.Y., in April, 1840, where James G. Birney was nominated for President, and Thomas Earle for Vice President. No name was given to the new organization till 1844, when it was christened "Liberty party."

%352. The Log Cabin, Hard Cider Campaign%.—The candidate of the Democrats (Martin Van Buren) was a shrewd and skillful politician. The candidate of the Whigs (Harrison) was the ideal of a popular favorite. To defeat him at such a time, when the people were angry with the Democrats, would have been hard, but they made it harder still by ridiculing his honorable poverty and his Western surroundings. At the very outset of the campaign a Democratic newspaper declared that Harrison would be more at home "in a log cabin, drinking hard cider and skinning coons, than living in the White House as President." The Whigs instantly took up the sneer and made the log cabin the emblem of their party. All over the country log cabins (erected at some crossroads, or on the village common, or on some vacant city lot) became the Whig headquarters. On the door was a coon skin; a leather latch string was always hanging out as a sign of hospitality, and beside the door stood a barrel of hard cider. Every Whig wore a Harrison and Tyler badge, and knew by heart all the songs in the Log Cabin Songster. Immense mass meetings were held, at which 50,000, and even 80,000, people attended. Weeks were spent in getting ready for them. In the West, where railroads were few, the people came in covered wagons with provisions, and camped on the ground days before the meeting. At the monster meeting at Dayton, O., 100,000 people were present, covering ten acres of ground.[1]

[Footnote 1: Shepard's Van Buren, pp. 323-335.]

[Illustration: William H. Harrison]

%353. William Henry Harrison, Ninth President; John Tyler, Tenth President%.—Harrison was triumphantly elected, and inaugurated March 4, 1841. But his career was short, for on April 4 he died,[2] and John Tyler took his place. Tyler had never been a Whig. He had always been a Democrat. Nevertheless, the Whigs, confident of his aid, tried to carry out certain reform measures.

[Footnote 2: His death was a great shock to the people. Two vice presidents, George Clinton and Elbridge Gerry, had died in office. But nobody seems to have thought it likely that a president would die.]

[Illustration: John Tyler]

%354. The Quarrel between Tyler and the Whigs%.—The first thing they did was to repeal the law establishing the Independent Treasury. This Tyler approved. They next attempted to reëstablish the Bank of the United States under the name of the "Fiscal Bank of the United States." Tyler, who was opposed to banks, vetoed the bill, and when the Whigs sent him another to create a "Fiscal Corporation," he vetoed that also. Then every member of the cabinet save Webster resigned, and at a meeting of the great Whig leaders Tyler was formally "read out of the party."

%355. The Webster-Ashburton Treaty%.—Webster was Secretary of State, and though a Whig, retained his place in order that he might complete a treaty which determined our boundary line from the source of the St. Croix to the St. Lawrence, thus settling a long dispute between Maine and the British provinces of New Brunswick and Canada. The difficulty arose over the meaning of terms in the treaty of 1783, and though twice submitted to a joint commission, and once to arbitration, seemed further than ever from a peaceful settlement when Webster and Lord Ashburton arranged it in 1842. The treaty ratified, Webster soon resigned.

[Illustration:]

The people meanwhile had recovered from the excitement of the campaign of 1840, and at the congressional election of 1842 they made the House of Representatives Democratic. There were thus a Whig Senate, a Democratic House, and a President who was neither a Whig nor a Democrat. As a consequence few measures of any importance were passed till 1845.