DAVID TOD AND THE GUBERNATORIAL
CAMPAIGN
OF 1844
by DELMER J. TRESTER
Historian, Wright Air Development
Center
The sound of twenty-six cannon shots
rolled across Columbus
on the morning of January 8, 1844,
noisily signaling the beginning
of a lively day in the capital.
"At 9 o'clock, the Columbus Guards
met the Dayton Artillery east of the
Scioto river, just as the most
splendidly beautiful brass piece of the
Dayton Artillery sent forth
several rounds. In half an hour the two
German Artillery com-
panies of this city joined the other
companies at the foot of Broad
street, and marched through the city.
They made a magnificent
appearance."1 The occasion for
this celebration, with its accompany-
ing pomp and circumstance, was the
Democratic state convention.
Delegates had come from throughout the
state to nominate a ticket
and draw up a platform for the coming
contest.
Despite the outward appearance of a
festive occasion, there must
have been misgiving and apprehension in
the minds of many who
witnessed the preconvention parade. For
a serious split had occurred
in the ranks of the Democrats.
The issue which separated a segment of
the Democrats from
the majority was the banking question.
Until 1842 there had been
no general banking legislation in Ohio.
Those banks in operation
secured their charters from the
legislature and were subject to its
direct control. However, in that year
the legislature passed the
Latham act, sponsored by the more
radical Democrats. Although
the act was a great improvement over
previous legislation because
it fulfilled the need for uniformity of
charters, the banking interests
and the Whigs denounced its strict
provisions.2 The Democrats
also insisted on enforced resumption of
specie payments by banks
and provided for that in the specie
resumption act. This law stated
1 Ohio Statesman (Columbus), January 8, 1844.
2 Charles C. Huntington, "History of Banking and Currency in Ohio
Before the
Civil War," Ohio State
Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, XXIV (1915),
191-192.
162
David Tod and the Campaign of 1844 163
that the charter and franchise of any
bank would be forfeited upon
the bank's failure to redeem its notes.
The Bartley act of February
21, 1843, was another general banking
law, which amended the
Latham law and contained a provision
reflecting the Democrats'
desire for individual liability of bank
officials and stockholders.3
Ohio bankers, either by collusion or
sincere dislike of the law,
refused to incorporate under its
provisions. They abhorred the in-
dividual liability clause; furthermore,
they delayed incorporating
while cherishing the hope that the
Whigs would soon pass a
favorable act.4
Not all Democrats were pleased with the
Bartley and specie
resumption acts. Thomas L. Hamer, along
with a group of West
Union followers, opposed the radical
banking legislation. In an
open letter addressed to Samuel Medary,
Democratic editor of the
powerful and radical Ohio Statesman,
Hamer maintained that the
Democrats were not reforming banks but
destroying them. Also,
Hamer charged that Medary had attempted
to impose his despotic
will on Democrats in the state in order
to make them conform to
his views and those of John Brough,
auditor of state.5 Here was
the beginning of a cleavage which
became progressively wider.
It was true, however, that the
beginnings of division in Democratic
ranks did not hamper them in the 1842
campaign. They managed
to elect not only their candidate for
governor, Wilson Shannon,
but also returned majorities to both
houses of the legislature. But
besides being a favorable year to
Democrats throughout the nation,
a good part of the Whig losses could be
ascribed to the resignation
(or "absquatulation," as it
was generally termed) of Whig legis-
lators to defeat the Democratic bill
for the single district plan
for apportioning representatives to
congress.6
A further sign of spreading unorthodoxy
relative to banking
resulted from Democrat Edson B. Olds's
introduction in the 1843
legislature of a new banking act which
did not contain the regular
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid., 178.
5 Ohio State Journal (Columbus), July 20, 1842.
6 Edgar A. Holt, Party Politics in
Ohio, 1840-1850 (Ohio Historical Collections, I,
Columbus, 1930), 91-99.
164
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
Democratic principle of individual
liability. By this time con-
servative opposition had increased, and
several newspapers in the
state challenged the position of the
radicals. The Zanesville Aurora,
the Chillicothe True Democrat, and
others took positions favoring
a more lenient banking policy.7
Perhaps of more serious import was the
course adopted by
Governor Shannon, who had already begun
to lose contact with
his party because of his alleged
intrigues with the national ad-
ministration of President Tyler
concerning a possible presidential
appointment.8 When Shannon
gave his annual message to the legis-
lature in December 1843, he asserted
that a "well-guarded and
well-restricted system of local banks,
judiciously distributed in the
State, with a fixed amount of capital,
adequate to the business
wants of the country, is the best and
most practical system of
banking that can, at this time, be
adopted in this State."9 This
statement went far afield from the
Democratic position; indeed,
it came close to an alignment with Whig
doctrine. It was in that
session of the legislature that the
first real break came in the
hitherto impenetrable legislative
position of the Democrats: the
Wooster Bank, the Bank of Xenia, and
the Lafayette Bank of
Cincinnati secured extensions of their
old charters, which thus
exempted them from the provisions of
the Bartley act.10
Therefore, when the Democrats met on
January 8, 1844, for
their state convention, there existed
considerable discord over the
most absorbing question of the day.
The name of David Tod came to the
convention as an odds-on
favorite for the gubernatorial
nomination. He was a native Ohioan,
having been born in Youngstown on
February 21, 1805. His father
was George Tod, prominent in Ohio's
early history as a pioneer,
lawyer, jurist, politician, and
soldier. David Tod, after a meager
education, studied law and obtained his
license in 1827. His
political faith was molded when he
became a follower of the
colorful Andrew Jackson. In 1832 he was
appointed postmaster of
7 Ibid., 103-105.
8 Ibid., 115-116.
9 Ibid., 112.
10 Ohio Executive Documents,
1843, Part I, No.
1 (Columbus, 1843), 7.
David Tod and the Campaign
of 1844 165
Warren and resigned that position in
1838 when he ran for state
senator. He won the race and served two
busy years in the legis-
lature. Although he did not run for
reelection in 1840, Tod
vigorously supported Democratic
candidates in the various elections
between 1840 and 1843. This work earned
for him the title of a
"giant of Democracy" as well
as an expert Whig "coonskinner."11
In the late summer of 1843 a movement
developed, particularly
among the radicals, to sponsor Tod's
candidacy. The Trumbull
Democrat, published in Warren, was one of the first to beat the
drums for Tod. Soon after, the Stark
County Democrat, the
Columbiana Ohio Patriot, and the Holmes County Farmer also
fell in line. There was little
inclination to renominate Governor
Shannon. His apostasy with regard to
the banking question and
his alleged desertion to the Tylerites
had quelled all enthusiasm
for him. Tod's path toward heading the
Democratic ticket also
became clearer when Joseph R. Swan
refused to have his name
considered by the convention.12
When the delegates of the Ohio
Democracy assembled at the
Columbus City Hall at ten o'clock, Tod
must have been reasonably
certain he would receive the
nomination. After a short organizational
meeting, the convention adjourned to
enable the county delegates
to take a poll among themselves and
appoint one member of each
district to cast the votes. The
representatives reassembled at three
o'clock in the afternoon. On the motion
of John Brough the con-
vention proceeded to vote for a
candidate, each district giving as
many votes as it had members in the
lower house of the legislature.
On the first ballot Tod received
sixty-four votes to one for
Robert Lucas of Pike County.
The convention, by acclamation, made
Tod's nomination unani-
mous. The concurrence of opinion in
favor of Tod, who was
universally regarded as a
"hard" on money matters, seemed odd
in view of the differences in the party
noted above. The only
possible explanation is that Medary and
his cohorts had done
an excellent undercover job in bringing
the prominent Democrats
11 See unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
The Political Career of David Tod (Ohio
State University, 1950), by Delmer J. Trester.
12 Cleveland Herald, September 15, 21, 1843; January 2, 1844.
166 Ohio
State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
under party discipline, and had
conducted an effective newspaper
campaign in support of Tod.
The committee appointed to wait on Tod
reported that he was
present. William Medill, the permanent
chairman, immediately
introduced him to the delegates. Just
before Tod began to speak
a grey-headed veteran in the ranks of
the party, Colonel Caldwell,
attracted the attention of Tod and the
assembly. He blurted out
the question that was probably in the
minds of many other delegates:
Was Tod in favor of banks? But
immediately he was drowned out
with cries of "Tod!-Tod!-go ahead
Tod!"
The newly nominated candidate began his
short address to the
delegates by eulogizing the Democratic
party and its principles
of "equal and exact privileges to
all." He censured the Whigs as a
group whose aims were to "take
power from the many and give
it to the few, to provide for, and
protect the rich, at the expense
of the poor."13 Tod
confessed that this difference in doctrine had
compelled him to join the Democratic
party as soon as he had
reached voting age, despite the fact
that Democrats were out-
numbered "ten to one" in the
area where he lived.
Then he touched upon the main issue of
the day. Still speaking
of the Democrats and their convictions,
he asserted:
It is their love for these principles
that induced them to insist . . . that
the banker should not be exempt from
the payment of his debts, while
the farmer is compelled to pay his;
hence, their insertion of what is
familiarly called the "private
responsibility clause" in bank charters; and
hence, their determination to insist
upon that clause. It is their love for
these principles that arrays them in
opposition to the establishment of a
National Bank, giving to a few the
control of the currency of the country,
and the custody of the funds of the
nation, and induces them to urge the
re-establishment of the Independent
Treasury law.
He closed his speech by deriding the
Whigs and their tenets of
liberal construction of the
constitution, high tariff, assumption of
state debts, distribution of land, and
a national bank.14
Although the Democratic press lavishly
lauded the acceptance
13 Ohio Statesman, January 9,
1844.
14 Ibid.
David Tod and the Campaign of
1844 167
speech, the Whigs greeted it with
derision. The Cleveland Herald
declared that Tod had made the speech
in a "bungling manner"
and had committed himself to doctrines
which were certain to
bring him defeat.15 The most
severe strictures appeared in the
Whig Western Reserve Chronicle of
Warren. It described the
speech as of the "lowest
trash" and declared that such expressions
could only be the "contents of the
cranium of a small beer
politician."16
The convention continued its labors and
drew up the party
platform. The delegates denied that
there was authority vested
in the government to incorporate a
national bank or issue paper
currency. They further resolved their
opposition to a protective
tariff, distribution, and the
assumption of state debts. All of
Oregon should be taken "in
immediate possession." Relative to
Ohio banking, one resolution stated:
"The Democratic party of
Ohio firmly insist upon the enforcement
of the laws upon the
subject of Banking now in force, and do
sternly and decidedly
vindicate and maintain the just and
sound principle of the Individual
Liability of Bankers for the debts of
their banks."17
Two days following the Democratic
convention, January 10, the
Whigs gathered in Columbus for the same
purpose. Although short
notice had been given and the roads had
become very muddy, the
delegates came in rather large numbers
to the city hall. Following
the rallying speeches by Thomas Corwin
and Henry Stanbery, the
evening session witnessed the
nomination of David Spangler of
Coshocton.18 Although the
delegates possessed a letter from
Spangler saying that he would not
accept the nomination if offered
to him, his friends were sure that he
would do so under the proper
unanimous conditions. They were
disappointed, however, when they
received a letter from Spangler, dated
January 13, declining the
nomination. He gave urgent business
affairs as the reason. There-
upon, the Whigs assigned February 22 as
the date for a second
convention. But the first convention
did draw up a platform. Reform
15 Ibid., January
13, 1844.
16 Ibid., January
23, 1844.
17 Ibid., January
11, 1844.
18 Ohio State Journal, January 11, 1844.
168
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
in the state government had been one of
the pre-campaign rallying
cries, and the Whigs included that as
an important plank in the
platform. They also advocated an
adequate currency and a change
in the banking laws.19 The
second convention was much more of
an enthusiastic gathering, complete
with an Indian chief, live
coons, and campaign songs. Mordecai
Bartley, who had served
in the state senate and national house
of representatives, was
elected as the Whig nominee.20
Soon after the first Whig convention an
interesting development
appeared in Democratic ranks. Delazon
Smith, conservative editor
of the Dayton Miamian, placed
Tod's name at the head of his
paper. But he did so reluctantly, for
he stated:
There must be more harmony existing in
the Democratic ranks than
appears to be at present, or a worse
than Waterloo defeat awaits us. The
delegates, or at least a number of them,
that we have seen, who were
members of the Convention, returned
disheartened, and are ready to hang
their harps upon the willow.21
Smith's hesitant support of Tod shortly
developed into outright
opposition when he heard of the latter's
unalterable support of
the Bartley law.
That was all Smith needed to publish an
expose of the inner
workings of the Democratic party. In his
paper he wrote that about
a year previously Samuel Medary had
warned Governor Shannon
to take the hard money stand. When
Shannon refused, Medary
sentenced him to political death. About
six months later Medary
invited William Allen, C. J. McNulty,
William Medill, John B.
Weller, and other Democratic chiefs to
a council meeting. It was
then agreed that Tod should replace
Shannon; and if the Democrats
secured a majority on a joint ballot of
the legislature, Medary
should be chosen United States Senator.
Tod was invited to
Columbus and apparently measured up to
the hard money re-
quirements of Medary. The latter, in
order to promote Tod as a
strong man in the party, wrote to
several newspaper editors in the
19 Ibid., January 17, 18, 22, 1844.
20 Ohio Statesman, February 22,
1844.
21 Dayton Miamian, quoted
in Cleveland Herald, January 19, 1844.
David Tod and the'Campaign of 1844 169
state whom he could trust. After these
papers had suggested Tod's
name, Smith charged,
in due time the editor of the Statesman
[Medary] copies into his paper a
string of puffs of the-is to
be Governor--and--very innocently declares
it, as his opinion that from the tone
of the Democratic press of the State
. . . David Tod, Esq., of Warren,
Trumbull county is the best and strongest
man and the manifest preference of the
Democracy.22
Choosing to ignore these accusations,
Tod went about the business
of going before the people and airing
his views. Appearing before
guests assembled for the Jackson Day
dinner in Columbus on
January 8, he made a short speech. Tod
promised his listeners that
he would take the field in person and
that he would begin at the
earliest possible moment by starting on
the following morning.23
This next day's address was made to the
Third Ward Hickory
Club of Columbus, at the Kraus Military
Hall. Several men spoke
in German as a prelude to the main
delivery by Tod. The latter
made an obvious bid for the German vote
by uttering political
platitudes to the effect that the
people from Germany sought liberty
here in the United States as Americans
tried to preserve it. Another
attempt by Tod to capture votes from
the foreign element occurred
the next evening when he appeared
before a meeting of the Irish
Repealers in the hall of the
legislature. Here he offered a few
words of encouragement for their cause.24
On the thirteenth Tod attended a
meeting of the Columbus
Hickory Club at the city hall. He
strongly stated his views on
the issues of the campaign, including
his advocacy of the Bartley
banking law. The chief Democratic organ
of Columbus was pleased
with Tod's "straight forward,
open-hearted, fearless manner of
expressing himself." It pointed
out that this was quite different
from the "silly, absurd, and
ridiculous mode of reaching the in-
tellect and reason of their hearers, by
a Kickapoo array of Indian
banners, cider barrels, doggerel songs,
ginger bread etc." employed
22 Dayton Miamian,
quoted in Ohio
State Journal, January 31, 1844.
23 Ohio Statesman, January 9, 1844.
24 Ibid., January
15, 1844.
170
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
by the Whigs.25 Even the
Whig party's paper, the Ohio State Journal,
was complimentary. "We rejoice
that a man has been chosen by
the Loco Focos who dare [sic] avow,
without equivocation, his
opinions, and all we have to ask is,
that he adhere to them with
the same candor before the people of
this State from this time
until the next election!!"
Apparently the editors thought these
irrevocable views of Tod were sure to
result in his defeat. They
promised their readers that they would
file these statements to
insure against any possible
transgression.26 Tod restated his firm
support of the Bartley banking law at a rally of the Warren
Hickory Club on January 27.27
It was in the latter part of February
that a bombshell was thrown
into the Democratic ranks. Tod left the
stump during the first
three weeks of February in order to
take care of pressing business
affairs. Shortly after he returned, the
Democratic central committee
of Cleveland wrote him a letter asking
him to state in accurate
terms his precise views on banking. The
members of the committee
thought this was necessary because
there had appeared some
misrepresentations in the Whig press.
Tod obliged. On February 27
he replied that he favored the old
system of banking (that system
existing before passage of the Latham
and Bartley acts) with the
following provisions inserted:
1st--The payment of the stock of the
Bank in Gold and Silver.
2nd--Individual liability on the part
of the stockholders for all debts of
the Bank.
3rd--Limit the issues of the Bank to
three times the amount of specie.
4th--Limit the loans to the officers
and stockholders, to at least one half
of their stock.
5th--Provide severe penalties, for all
frauds on the part of the officers
of the banks.
Tod concluded his letter by stating:
"With these provisions the
bill holder will be safe at all times.
This object accomplished,
banks would in my opinion conduce to the
interests of the people;
but without it all must certainly agree
that they are a great curse."28
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.
27 Western
Reserve Chronicle, January 30, 1844.
28 Ohio
Statesman, March 8, 1844.
David Tod and the Campaign of
1844 171
There is no question but that this was
a plea for conservative
support. The essence of the plea was
contained in his statement
that he favored "the old system of
banking." This implied a system
that would make it possible for the
banks to obtain their charters
individually from the legislature,
contrary to the provisions of
the Latham and Bartley acts.
Nevertheless, it was equally true
that Tod did not wish to lose the
support of the radicals. Although
he favored the "old system of
banking," he also would include
the five restrictions mentioned above.
These restrictions, in general,
were the same as those of the current
laws!
The explosion of the bombshell occurred
when the Whigs
attempted to prove that Tod had made a
sudden about-face in
his banking philosophy. The editors of
the Ohio State Journal
took him to task at great length and in
bitter terms. They made
great capital of the fact that Tod had
come out in favor of
"THE OLD SYSTEM OF BANKING." They called upon their readers
to witness this great recantation, and
cried, "What! expect the
people of Ohio to rally under the
banner of such a nose of wax;
who has in two short months taken two
positions wide apart as the
poles, on the great question before the people of this State;
and
who has done so only to obtain their
votes and confidence that he
may betray them!"29 Shortly
thereafter the Cincinnati Sun, which
had supported Tod, tore down his name
from its masthead. It
declared that the party should nominate
a new candidate who
would hold to the faith.30 The
Kalida Venture followed the same
course, calling the candidate's letter
"a strange and unlooked-for
tergiversation."31 The Cincinnati
Enquirer, however, which was
extremely radical in its banking views,
attached less importance to
the hasty action taken by the other two
papers and was certain
that Tod had not strayed from the
Democratic tenet of bank
reform.32
Tod himself realized that he had made a
mistake.33 Soon he
changed the tenor of his remarks and
again spoke in favor of the
29 March 9, 1844.
30 Western Reserve Chronicle, April 16, 1844.
31 Ohio State Journal, March 14,
1844.
32 Ibid.
33 Francis
P. Weisenburger, The Passing of the Frontier, 1825-1850
(History of
the State of Ohio, III, Columbus,
1941), 418.
172
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
Bartley law and declared that he
supported the Democratic position,
which stated that, relative to banking,
the party was in favor of
the status quo. This shift of
position again provoked a great out-
burst from the Ohio State Journal. It
published a certificate obtained
from prominent residents of Trumbull
County who swore that they
heard Tod declare "that as far as
the Democratic party was con-
cerned, the question was settled--that
they had passed Latham's
Law and Bartley's amendment, and if
capitalists would not take
stock under provisions of existing
laws, the Democracy would
offer no other terms."34 Throughout
the campaign the Whigs
continually played up Tod's alleged
duplicity. For example, at a
Whig mass meeting in Cleveland, one of
the floats in the parade
carried a portrait of Tod having two
faces, and an arm extended
either way. One hand pointed toward a
box of hard money,
representing his Columbus speech, and
the other grasped a twenty
dollar note indicating his Cleveland
letter.35 Nevertheless, during
the rest of the campaign Tod stuck to
his support of the more
radical position on banking.
Tod became particularly active on the
stump during the summer
months, when the weather favored
picnics and outdoor meetings.
From July 22 to October 4 he was slated
to appear on over fifty
platforms scattered throughout the
state.36 Other important Demo-
crats who were prominent on the speaker's
platform, sometimes
accompanying Tod, were John Brough,
William Allen, Thomas L.
Hamer, Benjamin Tappan, John B. Weller,
and David T. Disney.37
Perhaps Tod realized that the Cleveland
letter had cost him a large
block of votes and was determined to
recapture them by vigorous
stumping.
The Ohio State Journal greeted
this action of Tod's with derision.
It said that he was merely
"perambulating the State delivering
himself of a weak, false and
contemptible harangue, that he has
committed to memory from the columns of
the Statesman."38 Tod's
34 Ohio State Journal, June 6,
1844.
35 Cleveland Herald, May 16, 1844.
36 Ohio Statesman, July
17, 29, 1844; Ohio Coon Catcher (Columbus), August 31,
1844.
37 Ibid.
38 July
30, 1844.
David Tod and the Campaign of 1844 173
tour of the state was no political
junket; he worked hard to bring
some order out of the chaotic state
into which his campaign had
fallen. This was evident in a portion
of his remarks to an audience
of 1,200 people at St. Clairsville
during September. He made a
plea for unity, saying that he thought
victory in November was
possible, but only if the party became
"duly organized."39
Although local issues were more
important in the gubernatorial
race, and the banking question of
supreme importance, it must be
remembered that the state elections of
1844 occurred during the
national campaign between Polk and
Clay. In most of his speeches
Tod usually touched upon some phases of
the nation-wide issues.
He favored the acquisition of Oregon,
by force if necessary, and
thought that problem should be settled
quickly. He also adhered
to the Democratic stand on Texas,
favoring its annexation. The
slogan for the "Re-annexation of
Texas and the Re-occupation of
Oregon" appealed to the vigorous,
expansionist Northwest.40 On
several occasions Tod also spoke on the
subject of the "Dorrites,"
a group led by Thomas Dorr of Rhode
Island, who attempted to
secure an extension of the suffrage in
that state. As a result of his
activities Dorr had been imprisoned.
For him and his followers
Tod expressed a deep sympathy and
predicted that "the sense of
the American people will roll back in a
tide of contempt at the
imprisonment of Dorr [and] that those
prison walls cannot contain
his body for another year."41
One outstanding theme--that of
appealing to class consciousness
--became particularly noticeable in a
number of Tod's speeches.
It will be recalled that this was the
dominant theme contained in
his acceptance speech before the
convention. Tod emphasized it
again and again, usually when he spoke
on the tariff or distribution
of the proceeds of the sale of public
lands. He denounced the
tariff of 1842 as "unequal in its
operation and designed to throw
burdens of the Government on the
poor." He was careful, however,
always to point out that the Democrats
did not oppose all forms
39 St. Clairsville Gazette, September
13, 1844.
40 Ohio State Journal, August 13,
1844; Holt, Party Politics, 118.
41 Ohio Statesman, October 2, 1844.
174
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
of tariff, but did not favor the one
then on the statute books.42
Speaking in Cleveland on the subject of
distribution, Tod told his
listeners that by distribution Ohio
would receive about $250,000,
and this would substantially reduce
state taxes. But at the same
time it would raise the tariff in order
to replenish the national
treasury. This plan Tod regarded as
unequal. "I do not wish to
array the poor against the rich,"
he averred, "but I must declare
that no Democrat, addressing Democrats,
can help doing it."43
Meanwhile, Tod's opponent, Mordecai
Bartley, also toured the
state. The Whig position on currency
and banking had the support
of all members of the party, and
Bartley was not forced into the
political vortex in which Tod found
himself. The Whig candidate
stuck to his advocacy of a paper
circulating medium as being
the "product of an advanced state
of commerce," and necessary in a
"well-regulated system of
banking." A system of protective tariff
Bartley described as essential "to
protect the industry and in-
dependence of the people, and enable
them to compete successfully
with the low prices of Labor in
Europe." He also supported the
Whig doctrine of distribution, arguing
that the public lands had
been held in trust for the people of
the states, and following the
payment of the national debt, the
remaining proceeds should be
parceled out to the states for the
benefit of the people.44 Concerning
the Texas question Bartley thought the
proposed acquisition un-
constitutional and an unnecessary
addition to the national domain.45
Perhaps the only national questions
which influenced Ohio voters
in their gubernatorial choice were the
Texas and Oregon issues.
Tod's stand on both of these was the
more popular. But, by and
large, as one periodical put it,
"the people of Ohio care little
about Clay or Polk and less about Texas
and still less about dis-
tribution. They feel the want of a
circulating medium, in which they
can have confidence."46 Thus,
primary consideration was shown
to the currency and banking proposals
of both candidates.
42 Cleveland Herald, June 27,
1844.
43 Ibid., June 26, 1844.
44 Ibid., May 16, 1844.
45 Western Reserve Chronicle, July 23, 1844.
46 Thompson's Bank Note Reporter, quoted in Ohio State Journal, August 29,
1844.
David Tod and the Campaign of
1844 175
During the closing months of the
campaign, however, the news-
papers gave considerable space to
personal attacks upon Tod.
With Tod adopting a policy of
refraining from stressing the
banking issue, thus relieving the
pressure of Whig attacks in that
direction, the Whig press sought other
weaknesses in his armor.
When they found none, they created
them.
They linked the first of these with the
all-important banking
and currency issues. This was the
famous "pot metal" imbroglio.
The Whig press of the state secured a
certificate made by Justice
of the Peace Benedict of Braceville.
This sworn statement main-
tained that during the spring of 1844,
at a tavern in Ravenna, Tod
had used the following words: "I
believe there is gold and silver
enough in the United States to do
business with--if not, I would,
rather make up that deficiency with copper,
or even POT METAL."47
Although Tod vigorously denied ever
saying this, the charge stuck.
The Whigs used it to great
advantage--particularly in such displays
as the one held in Newark on September
3. Here the center of
attraction was a float carrying a
replica of a mint. The "workmen"
operating the mint cast "Tod
currency," or pot metal cent pieces,
as they passed along the streets, and
threw them to the crowd.
One side of these souvenirs showed a
likeness of Tod, and on the
other appeared the words, "not
worth one cent."48 On another
occasion the Whigs paraded a large
wagon which carried an
iron-furnace in full blast. Here they
molded "Tod dollars," about
two and one-half inches in diameter and
half an inch thick. Tod
secured one of these and later used it
as a paper weight in his
office at Youngstown as a humorous, but
somewhat grim reminder
of his youthful adventure into
politics.49
The opposition made an obvious attempt
to create a charge out
of thin air when it characterized Tod
as an infidel. This stemmed
from a letter written (and later
published) by W. H. Heer of
the Methodist Episcopal Church. Heer
contended that he had
endeavored to secure passage of a bill,
during the time that Tod
47 Western Reserve Chronicle, July 16, 1844.
48 Ohio State Journal, September
12, 1844.
49 George B. Wright,
"Honorable David Tod," Ohio State Archaeological and
Historical Quarterly, VIII (1900), 111.
176
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
served in the legislature, which would
have provided more safety
of worship by increasing to two miles
the distance from churches
that dealers in beer, cider, and
whiskey could operate. Heer pointed
out Tod as one who had opposed that
measure.50 The Western
Reserve Chronicle saw no inconsistency in elaborating the case to
describe Tod as a "profane
swearer, [one who] denies the truth
of revelation, and reviles the
Christian religion."51 The simple
truth of the matter was that he had
opposed the bill when it came
before the judiciary committee, of
which he was a member, because
he regarded it as unconstitutional. It
was only following the pub-
lication of testimonials on behalf of
Tod and a threat to sue the
Ohio State Journal for libel that the paper admitted it made its
charge too quickly and had misconstrued
Heer's letter.52
Having Tod on the run, the Whigs
proceeded to keep him there
in an almost humorous manner. The next
fabrication hurled at
him also grew out of his legislative
career. In closing a judiciary
committee's report, which Tod
apparently had read to the legis-
lature, he made the remark that the
committee felt justifiable pride
in being the first to be composed of
"native born sons." Obviously,
this related to the fact that all of
its members had been born in
Ohio. The Whigs expanded this innocent
remark to mean that
Tod was anti-foreign in his feelings
and that all his protestations
of love for the foreigners in Ohio were
unadulterated lies.53 Still
another vilification accused Tod of
failing to show proper respect
for the American flag,54 and
that in his private speech he swore
"with more frequency and fluency
than any man in Northern
Ohio."55 It was
somewhat wondrous that they placed such limita-
tions on the area!
Either the Democratic press was too
busy answering accusations
against Tod, or Bartley had led too
circumspect a political life,
for the latter was not subjected to the
treatment suffered by Tod.
Two weak attempts were made, however,
to sling mud at Bartley.
50 Ohio State Journal, July 16, 1844.
51 September 17, 1844.
52 July
19, 1844.
53 Ohio State Journal, August 3, 1844.
54 Scioto Gazette (Chillicothe), quoted in Cleveland
Herald, August 23, 1844.
55 Ohio
State Journal, September 28, 1844.
David Tod and the Campaign of
1844 177
The Ohio Statesman sneered at
him because during the time he had
served in the national congress he had
voted for John Q. Adams,
although his constituents had supported
Andrew Jackson. This
revived the old "corrupt
bargain" charge. The same paper also
blamed him for refusing to support a
resolution to recompense
individuals who had suffered
imprisonment under the provisions
of the alien and sedition law. But
these charges were not pressed,
and Bartley did not pay much attention
to them, letting them die a
natural death.56
All in all, it was a colorful campaign.
The publication of cam-
paign papers by both sides added
further interest. The Ohio State
Journal came out with the Whig Battering Ram, or
Straight-Out
Revived. The Ohio Statesman issued the Ohio Coon
Catcher, "to
aid in the great work of catching and
skinning coons in the ensuing
autumn."57 In Dayton
the Whig press released That Same Old Coon,
and the Democrats followed suit with The
Coon Dissector. Perhaps
the most interesting of the cartoons to
appear in any of these papers
during the campaign was one in the Ohio
Statesman. Pictured were
contrasting likenesses of a fat, sleek,
healthy "coon" representing
1840, and a lean and hungry-looking
creature depicting 1844.
Beneath the latter appeared the phrase,
"Sic transit gloria coonery !"58
The Whigs used the interesting device
of publishing, almost every
day, "renunciations" by
Democrats who had dropped their "Loco
Foco" alignment, and had deserted
to the Whig camp. Although
the campaign was not as interesting
from the spectator standpoint
as had been the one in 1840, a good
many of the same props
were used by both sides in an attempt
to catch the applause--and
votes--of their spectators.
Despite the mistakes Tod had made
during the campaign and
the harsh treatment he endured from the
opposition press, the vote
in October was very close. Bartley
received 146,333 votes; Tod,
145,022; and Leicester King, the
Liberty party candidate, 8,898.59
56 April 5, 1844.
57 The first issue of the Whig
Battering Ram appeared on August 9, while the
Ohio Coon Catcher began publication on August 17.
58 October 4, 1844.
59 Ohio State Journal, December
3, 1844.
178
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly
It was obvious from these results that
the Liberty party held the
balance of power between the two major
groups. However, there
was little cause for Tod to have made
any sort of bid for Liberty
party votes, because most of the
members were more sympathetic
toward the Whigs.60 Besides,
Tod had nothing to offer them.
It seems that the principal reason for
Tod's defeat was simply
that to a small portion of his party he
appeared too radical in his
banking views; when he attempted to
straddle the fence at one
point in the campaign, he lost some
radical support. Had he kept
his original position, and then made an
attempt to go slow on
banking while he emphasized other
issues, particularly his "rich
against the poor" argument, it is
possible he could have won.
But as it was, the Whigs not only
elected their candidate for
governor, but also returned majorities
to both houses of the legis-
lature. This meant a serious blow to
the Democrats, because it gave
the jubilant Whigs an opportunity they
had eagerly awaited--a
chance to pass their version of a
banking law.
Following the election Tod took one
more political step before
he returned to private life. It had
been rumored in Democratic
circles that Medary was in line for
election as senator from Ohio,
should the Democrats secure a majority
in both houses of the
legislature in October 1844. After
their failure Tod made an
attempt to help secure Medary an award
for his industrious efforts
in behalf of the party. Tod wrote a
letter to the newly elected
president, James K. Polk, and urged him
to include Medary in his
new cabinet as postmaster general.61
But Tod's appeal was in vain,
for Cave Johnson received the
appointment.
Two years later, in 1846, the Democrats
again selected Tod as
their standard bearer. But William Bebb
defeated him by a slender
margin. It was not until 1861, when he
shed his Democratic
allegiance and ran on the Union party
ticket, that Tod achieved
election as governor of Ohio.
60 Weisenburger, Passing of the Frontier, 439.
61 Tod to Polk, December 11, 1844. Polk Manuscripts, Library of Congress.