CHAPTER V TENDENCIES TOWARDS REALIGNMENT OF PARTIES The main task for which this study was undertaken has now been completed; that is, to show that both the Federalist and Republican parties, based on conditions connected with the geographical development of the United States up to the beginning of the constitutional period, were destroyed before 1825 in consequence of the changes incident to further geographical development. But the decade ending in 1825 was a period of party reformation as well as disintegration, and by the close of it the new party alignment was becoming fairly distinct. We can not fitly end our study, therefore, without a survey of the chief forces which shaped the new parties. 1 It seemed for a time that the contest over the admission of Missouri might lead to a new organization of parties on the basis of the slavery issue. The opposition to the admission of the new state sprang from two sources. The distrust of the West which the Federalists had shown survived the party and, when the Missouri question arose, still appreciably affected portions of the East;' the growing dislike of slavery affected the whole Northwest as well as the East, and tended to unite the Republicans of that region with the former Federalists in common antagonism to the spread of the institution. Most prominent among the opponents of the new state was Rufus King, at this time senator from New York. His speech of February, 1819, became the arsenal from which congressmen, 1 Hockett, H. C., "Rufus King and the Missouri Compromise," in Missouri Historical Review, II, 211-220. 2 See above, 67, f. n. 63; 75, f. n. 93. The tone in which easterners commonly referred to the people of the West is indicated by the following: "How do the wild men of the west relish a treaty that.... does not provide for the extinction of the Indians and the assumption of the 'uppermost' Canadas?" James Emott to Rufus King, Feb. 19, 1815. King, Life of King, V, 472. [Italics mine.] "A gentleman of intelligence informs us, that a most singular and sudden change has taken place in the minds of the inhabitants of our cities with respect to the western country [because of the pressure of hard times, which turned the thoughts of many towards the West.] The name but lately was associated with everything disagreeable and uncomfortable; it was used in nurseries for the purpose of frightening children." [Italics mine.] Supporter, May 12, 1819, quoting Pittsburg Gazette. Cf. the description of the emigrants and their motives, in Dwight's Travels, II, 458 et seq. Niles Register, Dec. 4, 1819. 127 newspaper writers, and other agitators drew their arguments during the whole contest. So marked was the effect of the movement in uniting the Federalists and Republicans throughout the North and West, and so central a figure was King, that many persons believed, with John Quincy Adams, that King had set on foot a concert of measures which should form the basis of a new alignment of parties. This opinion was supported by the stress which King placed upon the injustice of extending the political power of slavery, which seemed to outweigh in his mind its moral evils. Slave representation, he pointed out in his senate speech, already gave the southern states twenty representatives and twenty presidential electors more than their white population would entitle them to. The constitutional provision for such representation was an ancient settlement which faith and honor were bound not to disturb. But it was a settlement between the thirteen original states, and its extension to the new states which Congress might now be willing to admit would be unjust and odious. The states whose power would be abridged could not be expected to consent to it. The right of Congress to provide for the gradual abolition of slavery in Missouri he found to be implied in the constitutional provision that "Congress may admit new states." The antecedents of King's views are easily recognized. In the denunciation of the extension of southern power through the admission of new states in the West, we encounter again the old prejudice shown by Federalists in the constitutional convention, and at the time of the Louisiana Purchase and of the admission of the State of Louisiana. In the constitutional argument, too, we find an attempt to give to that instrument an interpretation according with the wishes of Gouverneur Morris and his associates, of whom King was one, when they framed the clause to which appeal was now made. Notwithstanding the well-nigh universal favor with which the anti-Missouri program met for awhile in the North, the country presently recognized the association of these doctrines with Federalism. Nor did the fact that King had been a leader of that party and the recipient of the last electoral votes which it cast, serve as a disguise for this association. The Republicans therefore grew suspicious, deeming the agitation a "federalist movement, accruing to the benefit of that party," and believing Adams, Memoirs, VI, 529. that King hoped to organize a sectional party on anti-slavery principles, under Federalist leadership, and strong enough to dominate the Union. That such was his conscious purpose is unproven and unlikely, but the belief seems to have caused a defection of both Republicans and Federalists from the anti-Missouri phalanx;" and the vote of northern members for the compromise may find its explanation in this way. There is even evidence that President Monroe was induced to forego his contemplated veto of the compromise bill, at the risk of forfeiting the endorsement of Virginia for a second term as president, by a conviction that the compromise would defeat the machinations of King.8 Here, then, was a question, originating in the process of westward expansion, which shows a new tendency- a tendency for the Northwest to sever its alliance with the Old South and to form a connection with that eastern section which had formerly been the seat of antagonism to it. With the progress of the frontier, in short, the Northeast was forgetting its earlier antipathy to the Ohio Valley, and stretching out its hands to it in common hatred of the type of institution which was appearing beyond the limits of the territory to which the Ordinance of 1787 applied." South as well as north of the river, besides, the course of western economic development, which had brought it into conflict with the planting region, had given it affinity for the new industrialism of the Northeast. "The West," said the Western Herald in 1823, "has no interest distinct from the interest of the grain growing and manufacturing states to the east." 10 The stage was set for a political revolution. Benton, Thomas H., Thirty Years' View, I, 10. "Let Missouri continue her efforts ... and a reaction may be produced which will prostrate those Hartford Convention men who now predominate in the north, and give the victory to the friends of the union and to the republicans of the Jeffersonian school.” [Italics mine.] St. Louis Enquirer, quoted in Niles Register, XVIII, 371 (Feb. 3, 1821). 7 Gore to King, Jan. 28, 1820, King, Life of King, VI, 259. 8 Congressional Globe, Thirtieth Cong., 2 sess., App., 63-67. See also Barbour Corre spondence, in William & Mary College Quarterly, X, 5-24. Cf. Ambler, Ritchie, 78-79. "I shall not be at all surprised if the Mo. affr. shd. strew the seeds of a new state of things agt. the next 4 yrs. after Mr. Monroe's next term. " R. H. Goldsborough, a Maryland Federalist, wrote to King, March 13, 1820. King, Life of King, VI, 307. "It does appear to me that the country has not so soon recovered from the Missouri question, and that the Eastern States, if they find the South and West too strong, will be inclined to cry out 'No Slavery,' and by these means compel Ohio and the Western free states to abandon their choice [Clay for president] and unite in this policy." Edward King to Rufus King, Jan. 23, 1823. Ibid., 497, 10 March 1. ་ The adoption of the Missouri Compromise practically removed the slavery issue as a factor in the reshaping of parties, although some echoes of it were heard during the campaign of 1824, leaving the chief role in the readjustment of the political relations of sections to be played by economic questions. Only on the surface was the campaign of 1824 a personal contest among men holding "common Republican principles." The persistence of the old party name has served to disguise the wide divergence in the views of the candidates, and the colorless character of the statements made on behalf of some of them has tended the same way. In reality such statements usually emanated from the prudence which perceived the antagonism of sectional interests and knew that clean-cut pronouncements would destroy the chance of general support. It was necessary, so far as possible, to make each candidate acceptable everywhere, which really meant that the voters in each section must be satisfied that the candidate was friendly to the interests of that section. The period had arrived when the West was ready to assert itself. Keenly conscious of its interests and its strength, it laid claim to the highest office in the land, and to a determining influence in shaping the national policies. The growth of the West, having proven the decisive factor in sapping the foundation of the old parties, was now to assert an equally important influence on the evolution of the new. For a glimpse at the formative influence of the section in this respect we cannot do better than to take Ohio. Ohio had attained fourth place among the states of the Union, and was first in the West. Having no candidate of its own, as did Kentucky and Tennessee, its vote represents a more impartial judgment than that of either of these; while the newer states, just because they were new, played a relatively unimportant part in this election. The mixed character of the population of Ohio, moreover, which was far more representative of the several older regions than was the case in either of the neighboring states, made it a fair battleground for all of the candidates, and gave its attitude toward their respective claims unique significance.11 11 In collecting material on Ohio, I have been aided by the work of students in my graduate seminar. I am especially indebted to Mr. E. H. Roseboom, scholar in American History in Ohio State University, 1915-1916, who made, under my direction, a study of Ohio in the Presidential Campaign of 1824, in connection with his candidacy for the degree of M. A. This study appears in Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, XXVI, 153-224. In the early stages of the state campaign the slavery question seemed likely to be again prominent.12 Sentiment in Ohio had been practically united in opposition to the admission of Missouri as a slave state, and to the end of the campaign many persons felt that slavery should be regarded as the paramount issue. In general, however, it was felt that the Missouri question should be considered as settled, and many of those who had been most ardent in their wish to prolong the fight against slavery yielded to the view that economic interests should be ranked first.13 As to what were the economic interests of the West there was no disagreement.1 It is L equally clear that the people regarded the election as an oppor 12 Cf. Charles Hammond's expectation concerning the influence of the Missouri question: "A new state of parties must grow out of it. Give me a Northern President, whether John Quincy Adams or De Witt Clinton, or anybody else, rather than that things should remain as they are." Smith, W. H., Charles Hammond and his Relations to Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams, 32. See also letter of Edward King to his father: "If the Missouri question should present itself, in the contest, Ohio probably would leave her favorite [Clay] and support Mr. Adams." November, 1822. King, Life of King, VI, 487. 13 "The ignis fatuus 'western interest,' is like to absorb every sound moral and political consideration." Ohio Monitor, quoted by Delaware Patron, Sept. 16, 1823. James Wilson, editor of the Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, opposed Clay on anti-slavery grounds until it became evident that the slavery issue was subordinate to economic questions. Then he turned to Clay. Western Herald, issues March 1 and 22, 1823, and April 24, 1824. Clay himself believed in February, 1824, that Ohio would vote for "no man residing in a slave state but me, and they vote for me because of other and chiefly local considerations." Letter to Francis Brooke. Colton, Life of Clay, IV, 86. 14 "It will be recollected that the promotion of domestic measures is the ground we assume as the criterion of our choice. Those candidates who are unfavorable, or not known to be favorable to these measures we throw out of the question. . . . ." Liberty Hall, Nov. 14, 1823. "So far as we have been able to learn the sentiments of the editors of this state, we believe, however they may differ on other subjects, that they pretty generally agree in this one important point:-that we ought to support that man for the Presidency, other things being equal, who will most effectually encourage domestic manufactures and internal improvements." Ibid., Jan. 6, 1824. Friendliness to domestic industry and internal improvements "is a sine qua non-an article of faith, to which every political aspirant must subscribe, before he can expect to be honored with their [Ohio voters'] suffrages." Supporter, March 25, 1824. ... "Mr. Clay will in all probability be the first choice of Ohio; but in case it shall be found that he cannot become one of the three highest in votes, it will become our duty.. to turn our attention to the candidate who shall come the next nearest to our standard in point of qualification. This standard is (1) Encouragement to domestic industry. (2) Internal improvements, by roads and canals. (3) Inflexible integrity." Western Herald. The Herald had favored making slavery the chief issue. See above, f. n. 13. In announcing the founding of a new paper, The Ohio Journal, the publishers disavow any intention of establishing a party organ, but to "prevent misapprehension of our sentiments and of the course we intend to pursue [we] declare ourselves desirous of seeing a man elected whose policy will cause us as a nation to be respected abroad and will foster at home those two great main stays of a free and independent people-Domestic Manufactures and Internal Improvements." Hamilton Intelligencer and Advertiser, Aug. 16, 1824. See similar announcement of the Western Statesman, in Supporter, Dec. 20, 1824. |