“Why this region of concentrated population, the towns along the Erie canal, should contain such a large part of the foreign element is probably due to numerous causes. This was a region of great activity and growth; a place where there was room for unskilled as well as skilled labor of all kinds; it was along a direct route of transportation and travel to the great and growing west and a foreigner knowing nothing about the country and having no definite destination would stop along the route wherever he could make a living. Although chance may have largely determined the location of the foreigners in this new country, his old environment was also an important factor in determining his place of settlement. He came from an old and well settled region in Europe where the population was concentrated and the country often overcrowded and in coming to America he would tend to seek a region of somewhat similar characteristics. He found these conditions with the exception of an overcrowded population in the densely settled country immediately along the Erie canal and the Hudson.

“In turning to the New Englander in New York we find a people of an entirely different education and character from that of the foreigner. This is seen most strikingly in the choice of their location. They were shrewd, frugal, and hardworking farmers who left their New England homes because they failed to supply their wants. In seeking a new home in the west they naturally followed their old occupation and for this reason we find the larger part of them in the rural region. In Class I of Section A, 4.1% was of New England birth; in Class II 2.7%, and in Class III, 5.2%; in Class I of Section B, 5.7%, in Class II, 9.7%, and in Class III, 10.1%; in Class I of Section C, 10.1%, in Class II, 10.3% and in Class III, 11.7%. The New Englander also tended to shun the large cities. In Albany 5.1% was of New England birth, and in Utica 7.8%, while in Class I of Section B, in which these two cities were situated, 5.7% was of New England birth. In Buffalo 9.3% was of this origin and in Rochester 9.6% while in Class I of Section C 10.1% originated in New England.

“The preceding discussion leads us to the conclusion that the foreigner was massed in the region of concentrated population and especially in the cities, and as the concentration of population diminished, the per cent of foreigners decreased. In other words, along the Erie Canal lay the larger part of the foreign population. Of this foreign population in New York State, the larger per cent was born in Great Britain and her dependencies, and this class was chiefly found where the population was thickest. The New Englander constituted a larger part of those born in other states of the Union and they were found chiefly in the rural regions.”

In his study of politics as presented in the territory traversed by the Erie Canal Mr. Winden raises most interesting questions. We quote him in full, appending his notes:

“Turning now to the political aspect in New York State during this period we find a complicated problem. In the election of 1830 there were two important parties. Summing up the principles for which these two important political parties of New York stood in this election, we find that the Anti-Masonic or National Republican party opposed the Masonic order;[43] supported Clay’s American policy of protection and the extension of the internal improvement system;[44] catered to the workingmen[45] and opposed the administration of both the national and state government. In other words it was like all new parties, gathering to its fold all the radical elements by adopting some of their ideas.[46] In the campaign which followed they made an aggressive canvass, making the most of the Morgan outrage. The Republican, or Masonic party, as it was called by the Anti-Masons, tried to be indifferent to the Masonic order and disavowed all support of it;[47] opposed the American system and did not advocate an extensive local improvement system[48] and supported the national and state administrations. They conducted a defensive campaign against the accusations of the Anti-Masons.

“Before considering the vote of the election it is necessary to take a hasty view of the social and economic conditions of the state at that time. Morgan had disappeared in western New York four years before and this had caused a great local opposition to the Masons which had spread throughout the state and even into neighboring states. The internal improvement movement had assumed stupendous proportions; the state had completed four canals within the last seven years; the Champlain in 1823, the Erie in 1825, the Oswego in 1828, and the Cayuga and Seneca in 1829. And the people were clamoring for more. Just after the completion of the Erie canal in 1825, petitions for other canals had poured in from almost every county in the west.[49] Thus it can be safely said that the entire western part of the state was in favor of internal improvements at public expense.

“Now considering the vote, we find that Section A gave a large majority to Mr. Throop, the Republican candidate. In Section B he also received a majority but not as great as in Section A. In this section an important fact is noticeable, Classes II and III gave a smaller majority to Mr. Throop than Class I. These two classes having no canals thus expressed their desire for some means of communication. Section C cast a large majority in favor of Mr. Granger, the National Republican candidate. The result in Section C was just what we should expect. Class III of this section which was in most need of some means of communication voted a much larger majority in favor of Mr. Granger than Classes I and II. The cities, however, gave a majority to Mr. Throop, Utica casting a larger and Albany a smaller majority than the class in which they are situated. Buffalo also cast a majority in favor of Mr. Throop, although the class in which it is situated cast a majority in favor of Mr. Granger. (See table.)

“Thus it is clearly shown that the people largely voted for the respective candidates because they stood for economic principles which were of direct interest to them.[50] The most densely populated east determined the election and Mr. Throop, the Republican candidate, was elected by a vote of 128,842. Mr. Granger received 120,361 votes, mostly from the west and rural regions which were demanding internal improvements, while Mr. Williams, the candidate of the dissatisfied Working Men’s party, received 2,332 votes.[51]

ELECTION OF 1830

Section AThroopGranger
Class I60%40%
Class II6238
Classes I and II6040
Class III6040
Section B
Class I5842
Class II5446
Classes I and II5743
Class III5545
Section C
Class I4456
Class II4456
Classes I and II 4456
Class III3961
Cities
Albany5446
Buffalo52-48+
Utica60+ 40-