The Presidential contest of 1848 for the first time presented the Native American party in the field with national candidates. It had its origin chiefly from the Philadelphia riots of 1844, resulting from a bitter feud between the Catholics and Protestants in the uptown river districts of Philadelphia. The organization of the Native American party immediately followed in Philadelphia, with opposition to Catholics and foreigners as its faith, and for nearly a decade it held the balance of power between the Whigs and Democrats in that city, and several times elected members of Congress. A like party was organized in New York, and attained some local success in that city. The national convention of the Native Americans was held in Philadelphia in September, 1847, and while it did not make a formal nomination, it recommended General Taylor for President and chose Henry A. S. Dearborn, of Massachusetts, for Vice-President. The party was unknown and unfelt in the contest, although it aided somewhat in giving the electoral vote of Pennsylvania to Taylor.

In November, 1847, the Liberty party, that had twice nominated and ran Birney as its candidate for President, met at New York and nominated John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, for President, and Leicester King, of Ohio, for Vice-President. When the Free-Soil Democracy developed huge proportions and nominated Van Buren, the old Abolition party was entirely absorbed in the Free-Soil organization. The Liberty League, made up of a small number of the more radical Abolitionists, held a meeting at Rochester on the 2d of June, 1848, and nominated Gerrit Smith, of New York, for President, and Rev. Charles E. Foote, of Michigan, for Vice-President; and what was called the Industrial Congress, made up of a handful of labor agitators, met at Philadelphia on the 13th of June, 1848, and nominated Gerrit Smith for President and William S. Waitt, of Illinois, for Vice-President. Neither the Hale Abolition party, the Liberty League Abolition party, nor the Industrial Congress party presented any electoral tickets of which I have been able to find any record. The canvass was a very earnest one, and the Whigs steadily grew in confidence as it progressed, while the Democrats were threatened on every side with disaster.

Pennsylvania broke from her Democratic moorings at the October election, when William F. Johnson, Whig, was elected Governor by 305 majority, and generally the preliminary elections were favorable to the Whigs. There were then thirty States, as Florida had come in March 3, 1845; Texas, December 29, 1845; Iowa, December 28, 1846, and Wisconsin, May 29, 1848, and the Presidential electors were then for the first time all chosen on the same day, with the single exception of Massachusetts. Van Buren did not carry a State, but he gave Taylor an easy triumph by the large Democratic defection he caused in the pivotal States. The following table exhibits the popular and electoral votes as declared by Congress:

STATES.Popular Vote.Electors.
Zachary Taylor, La.Lewis Cass, Mich.Martin Van Buren, N. Y.Taylor.Cass.
Maine35,12539,88012,096—9
New Hampshire14,78127,7637,560—6
Vermont23,12210,94813,8376—
Massachusetts61,07035,28138,05812—
Rhode Island6,7793,6467304—
Connecticut30,31427,0465,0056—
New York218,603114,318120,51036—
New Jersey40,01536,9018297—
Pennsylvania185,513171,17611,26326—
Delaware6,4215,898803—
Maryland37,70234,5281258—
Virginia45,12446,5869—17
North Carolina43,55034,869———11—
South Carolina[13]——————————9
Georgia47,54444,802———10—
Alabama30,48231,363————9
Florida3,1161,847———3—
Mississippi25,92226,537————6
Louisiana18,21715,370———6—
Texas4,50910,668————4
Arkansas7,5889,300————3
Missouri32,67140,077————7
Tennessee64,70558,419———13—
Kentucky67,14149,720———12—
Ohio138,360154,77535,354—23
Michigan23,94030,68710,389—5
Indiana69,90774,7458,100—12
Illinois53,04756,30015,774—9
Wisconsin13,74715,00110,418—4
Iowa11,08412,0931,126—4
Totals1,360,0991,220,544291,263163127

All parties made earnest efforts to control the popular branch of Congress, and national interest naturally centred in the Wilmot district of Pennsylvania, as he was the author of the Wilmot Proviso, that was the fountain of the slavery dispute. He had been twice elected to Congress in what was then a strong Democratic district, composed of Bradford, Susquehanna, and Tioga, but which have been among the strongest Republican counties in the State since the organization of that party. The district had given over 2000 majority for Polk against Clay, and although Wilmot was the only member of Congress from Pennsylvania who voted for the tariff of 1846, he was re-elected in the fall of that year by a decided majority.

When Van Buren was nominated, Wilmot openly declared himself as a Free-Soil Democrat, but he received the regular Democratic nomination for Congress in his district. The Cass pro-slavery Democrats bolted and nominated Jonah Brewster as a Simon-pure Democrat, and the Whigs nominated Henry W. Tracy, confidently expecting to elect him. Wilmot was triumphantly elected, receiving 8597 votes to 4795 for Tracy, Whig, and 922 for Brewster, Cass Democrat. He also nearly evenly divided the Democratic vote of Bradford and Tioga between Cass and Van Buren, giving Taylor a large plurality over Cass in the district.

While the Wilmot Free-Soil Democrats bolted on the Democratic national ticket, they generally supported Morris Longstreth, the Democratic candidate for Governor, who was defeated by Johnson in October by 305 majority. The re-election of Wilmot in one of the strong Democratic districts of Pennsylvania greatly strengthened the antislavery cause throughout the country. He and his followers fell back into the regular Democratic line in 1852 in support of Pierce, and they finally severed their relations with the Democratic party in 1854, provoked by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and in 1856 they carried the Northern counties of the State by large majorities for Fremont.

Cass carried every State west of the Pennsylvania line, including Ohio, where the antislavery sentiment of the Western Reserve was unwilling to accept a large slaveholder as a candidate for President. Corwin, the most brilliant and impressive of the stump-speakers of that day, made desperate efforts to save the State, but Van Buren received over 35,000 votes, and Cass won the electors by a plurality of over 16,000. I once heard Corwin in his inimitable way tell the story of that campaign. The people of Ohio in that day were taught their politics by mass-meetings, and any one of the audience was entirely at liberty to interrogate the speaker. Corwin, in his plausible and fascinating way, was trying to explain how the antislavery cause would be best served by electing a slaveholder President, when a tall, lank countryman, sitting on the fence, put a very pointed question to him, that he felt unable to answer. He tried to meet it in a humorous way, but only aroused his interrogator to make a more pointed inquiry of him, that Corwin could not answer. He was one of the few orators who could convulse an audience with his superb humor, and his facial expression was at times even more mirth provoking than his language. The question involved the negro issue, and Corwin had an unusually swarthy complexion, and he unhorsed his inquirer by saying to his audience with an expression that powerfully accentuated his remark: “I submit, fellow-citizens, whether it is proper to put such a question to a man of my complexion,” and the dispute ended in boisterous laughter and cheers for Corwin. The Whigs won easy victories in all the debatable States of the South; and General Taylor came to the Presidency knowing less about how his election had been accomplished than any man who had ever been called to the Chief Magistracy of the Republic. Thus was Martin Van Buren avenged for the Southern betrayal of 1844.

FRANKLIN PIERCE