OHIO IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1824.
The characterization of the period of Monroe's presidency as
the "Era of Good Feeling" has done much to obscure the true
nature of the decade 1815-1825. It has been rather generally
thought of as a period in which the Jeffersonian Republican party
so completely dominated that the rival presidential candidates of
1824 represented substantially the same principles and policies.
Recent scholarship is showing the superficiality of this view, and
revealing the fact that the years in question were years of disin-
tegration for the Republican as well as for the Federalist party,
and of recombination of political elements into new party group-
The basic fact in the party transformation of this epoch is
the revolutionary change which took place in the relations of the
great economic interests and geographical sections. The Federal-
ist and Republican parties were originally organized on the basis
of conditions existing about the time of the adoption of the con-
stitution. Their geographical basis was the region between the
Alleghany Mountains and the Atlantic. But by the end of the
first quarter of the nineteenth century a new world had come into
being west of the mountains. One person in fifteen of the popu-
lation of the United States lived beyond the mountains in 1790;
in 1830 the ratio was six in fifteen. This relative increase in the
West meant that the center of economic and political power, as
well as of population, was moving westward. One result was an
alteration of the relative weight of the economic groups engaged
respectively in ocean commerce, manufacturing, staple-growing,
and farming. Another result was a disturbance of the political
alliance between economic groups and geographical sections in-
volved in the two original parties. Finally, new groupings and
154 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
alliances resulted, forming the new party groupings of the Jack-
To these changes is due, in the last analysis, the decline and
fall of Federalism. To them is due also the disruption of Re-
publicanism; for the Republicanism of the original southern states
was at odds in many ways with the "young" Republicanism of the
rising West. In consequence of differing interests, on questions
of internal improvements, the protective tariff, and interpretation
of the constitution, especially, the Old South and the New West
diverged. By 1824 the Republican name had ceased to represent
any vital union between the two wings of the party.
The working of the influences which disrupted the Repub-
lican party and foreshadowed the new party groupings can no-
where be studied to better advantage than in the State of Ohio.
By 1824 Ohio led the western states in population and ranked
fourth in the Union. Unlike Kentucky and Tennessee, she had
no son of her own in the campaign of that year, so that her
attitude was less affected by local pride. Moreover, the mingling
of sectional elements in her population made the conflict within
her bounds fairly typical of the contest in the country at large.
With these considerations in mind, it is evident that Mr.
Roseboom's monograph is more than a study in local Ohio politics.
It throws light upon the political situation in the entire United
States. It is an example of that intensive analysis of local con-
ditions upon which alone sound generalizations can be based.
Mr. Roseboom's study was presented as a thesis in candi-
dacy for the degree of Master of Arts in American History in
Ohio State University.
HOMER C. HOCKETT,
Department of American History,
Ohio State University.
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................. 157
1. General features of election of 1824.
2. Ohio in election of 1824.
II. SITUATION IN THE BEGINNING .............................. 161
1. Probable issues.
2. Candidates. Strength and weaknesses.
3. Possible alignments.
III. THE PRELIMINARY CAMPAIGN.............................. 170
1. The legislative nomination.
2. The Clinton movement.
3. Politics of 1823.
4. Revival and decline of Clinton.
5. Calhoun in Ohio.
6. The Congressional caucus and its effects.
IV. PARTIES AND CONVENTIONS ................................. 180
1. The Jackson movement.
2. The Clay electoral ticket.
3. The Adams electoral ticket.
4. The Adams-Jackson proposed alliance.
5. The Jackson convention.
6. The Clay meeting at Columbus.
7. The Adams meeting at Columbus.
V. THE CAMPAIGN FOR CLAY .................................. 191
1. Tariff and internal improvements.
2. Other features of Clay's strength.
3. The slavery issue.
4. The Bank issue.
5. Charges against Clay's private life.
6. The Clay-Crawford coalition charge.
7. Rumors of withdrawal.
VI. THE CAMPAIGN FOR JACKSON .............................. 200
1. Personal nature.
2. Jackson and western interests.
3. Idea of united west.
4. Attitude of other parties toward Jackson.
VII. THE CAMPAIGN FOR ADAMS ................................ 205
1. Adams' arguments.
2. Attacks on Adams personally.
3. Adams and the domestic policy.
VIII. THE ELECTION BY THE PEOPLE.............................. 214
1. The vote.
2. Analysis of the returns.
3. Results of the popular election.
IX. THE HOUSE ELECTION ..................................... 218
1. The Ohio situation.
2. The House election.
3. Effects in Ohio.
4. Was the result acceptable?
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................... 223
OHIO IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1824.
BY EUGENE H. ROSEBOOM, M. A.
INTRODUCTION - GENERAL FEATURES.
When James Monroe became president of the United States
it seemed to many superficial observers that party divisions were
at an end and that the country would never see a recurrence of the
bitter party spirit so evident in that period of our history when
foreign relations were of primary importance. The close of the
Napoleonic Era seemed to mean the end of party strife in the
United States, and the terms Federalist and Republican lost their
early meaning. But the disappearance of party divisions could
not be permanent. New problems were arising during Monroe's
administration which were to be the sources of party and sec-
tional divisions, which have never since been absent from
In the election of 1824 these problems first show themselves
as political issues and out of this election comes a new alignment
of parties and the complete break-up of the old Republican party
so long dominant in national affairs. Because it is the great
transition election from the old era to the new, the election of
1824 is of more than ordinary importance.
In this campaign appear the beginnings of the characteristic
features of the American party system as it is known today.
Party conventions, addresses to the people, semblances of party
organizations, division of local parties on national issues, all be-
gin to take form while the old party machinery, of which the
congressional caucus was a conspicuous feature, is relegated to the
scrap heap. New machinery better fitted for growing democracy
was in process of construction.
The most obvious feature of the campaign of 1824 and the
one by which it is best remembered is the large number of can-
158 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
didates. Under the Virginia presidents the election of the chief
executive had ceased to be a real contest but the year 1824 showed
that such a condition was not to become permanent. Growing
democracy was demanding a larger share in choosing the presi-
dent, and statesmanship and long training were beginning to be
regarded with distrust in some quarters. In this campaign at one
time or another there were at least seven candidates, though not
all formally nominated, and one or two others were considered
as possibilities. Adams, Calhoun, and Crawford from Monroe's
cabinet, Clay and Lowndes from Congress, DeWitt Clinton, and
Andrew Jackson comprise the active list. This number was re-
duced to four at the election.
The number and prominence of the candidates and the bit-
terness of the campaign have caused many historians to overlook
the issues and regard the campaign as largely decided on personal
grounds. To take this view is to overlook the underlying sec-
tional issues. The personality of a candidate always plays a
strong part in presidential campaigns, and this was true in 1824 as
it has been since. But to pass by the issues is to lose what is per-
haps the most significant feature of this election.
The strong national feeling following the war of 1812 was
giving way to the demands of sectional interests. The South,
feeling the burdens of the tariff, was aligned in opposition to the
protective system and was showing a noticeable lack of en-
thusiasm over internal improvements by the national government.
New England was divided between her commercial and manufac-
turing interests but was still inclined to oppose the tariff. The
Middle States were strongly for protective tariff to encourage
their manufactures and for internal improvements to secure
western markets. The West, almost wholly agricultural and suf-
fering from lack of markets, was strongly in favor of both in-
ternal improvements and tariff. It felt that its demands had been
too long ignored by the national government and that the time
had come when western interests should be given the considera-
tion the size and importance of that section deserved.
Then, too, there was the partially dormant slavery question
which had arisen in 1820 over the Missouri question. At first
it seemed probable that this would play a leading part in the
presidential campaign, but, as nothing appeared to cause further
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 159
160 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
friction, it was pushed into the background by more pressing
questions, though it still had a real influence on the election.
With these opposing sectional interests at work no candidate,
with so many competitors in the field, could hope to carry the
election unless he conciliated opposing interests. This explains
why the candidates themselves said so little about the issues and
conducted the campaign on personal grounds. But their sup-
porters in the various states fought it out on these issues and it is
to the local campaigns that one must go to understand the real
significance of the election.
Ohio in this election offers an interesting study of the forces
of sectionalism. By 1824 Ohio had become the most important
of the western states and ranked fourth in the whole union in
population although she had been a state for only two decades.
Her population had come from all sections in varying numbers
and this partly explains the sectional character the contest of 1824
assumed in the state. Ohio was both western and northern in her
interests. Drawn to the other western states by their common
need for internal improvements and a protective tariff, she was
partly repelled by the slavery existing in some of them. United
with New York and Pennsylvania in opposition to slavery and in
favor of tariff and internal improvements, she was kept from a
union with the rest of the North by the opposition of the com-
mercial Northeast to western policies. Though the South had
been the chief market for the products of Ohio, the opposition of
that section to the tariff and internal improvements, besides
the slavery question, made a union of the South and the North-
west an impossible thing. Thus Ohio found herself both western
and northern in her interests, and the attempts to choose the
presidential candidate who would best represent her resulted in
a bitter struggle which remained in doubt to the very last.
Of the more important states only New York and Ohio were
really doubtful. This situation in the former state was due
largely to the fact that the legislature chose the electors and its
attitude was very uncertain. But in Ohio it was a question of
how the people would vote and partisanship reached a white heat.
This was an unusual situation as previous presidental campaigns
had aroused but slight interest in the state, the vote always fall-
ing far below that cast at state elections. Ohio was so over-
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 161
whelmingly Republican that the small minority of Federalists had
made but slight efforts for their candidates. Besides, the elec-
toral vote of Ohio had not been of sufficient importance to affect
the general result and the country at large was little interested in
what the state did. But in the electoral college of 1824 she was
to have sixteen electoral votes, and, furthermore, was not com-
mitted to any one candidate. It was a prize well worth fighting
for. Thus in 1824 for the first time, Ohio played that important
part in a presidential election which has been attributed to this
state in so many campaigns since.
THE SITUATION IN THE BEGINNING.
The Ohio campaign began as in other states very early in
Monroe's second term but it can hardly be regarded as other
than political maneuvering and sounding of public sentiment
until the legislative caucus, early in January, 1823. From this
time on the campaign was actually under way though it did not
assume its final form until the spring of 1824 when the field of
candidates was reduced in Ohio to the three who finally made
In the early stages the slavery issue resulting from the
Missouri Compromise loomed large. It was expected that this
would largely determine the election. Charles Hammond, who
played an important part in the Ohio campaign and who dis-
liked Adams because of his desertion of the Federalist party,
wrote at the time of the Missouri struggle: "A new state
of parties must grow out of it. Give me a Northern President,
whether John Quincy Adams or DeWitt Clinton, or anybody
else, rather than that things should remain as they are."1 Yet
Hammond, always an opponent of slavery, found this issue
so subordinated in 1824 that he took charge of Clay's campaign
in Ohio and opposed the northern candidate.
Edward King, writing from Ohio to Rufus King in No-
vember, 1822, said of the situation: "Ohio is decided at present
1Smith, Charles Hammond, 32.
162 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
for Mr. Clay, and I know no person, who would be able to alie-
nate her, except Clinton, who would receive the support of the
North and Eastern part of the State. He (Mr. Clay) will un-
doubtedly be the first choice, and I think Mr. Adams the second.
If, however, the Missouri question should present itself, in the
contest, Ohio probably would leave her favorite and support
Mr. Adams."2 King was not personally friendly to Adams.
Some two months later he further expressed his belief
that the Missouri question would play a part in the election.
"It does not appear to me," he said, "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 and unite in this policy."3
The editor of the Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette,
James Wilson, grandfather of Woodrow Wilson,4 expressed in
rather violent language his opinion of southern threats to
divide the union.5 He charged that Clay was the friend of
slavery, that he had yielded to southern threats in the Missouri
question and might yield to them on the tariff for the supposed
integrity of the union.6 Yet by the spring of 1824 this same
editor was ready to declare for Clay. He explained that, while
he had hoped the Missouri question would have a strong effect
on the election, the northern states had selected their candidates
without reference to it and there was no further use in agitating
it when there were nearer and more vital interests at stake.7
This was the view of many who had been strongly opposed to
the Missouri compromise.
Clay himself was keenly aware of the Ohio situation in
regard to the slavery issue. Writing to Francis Brooke in
2King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, VI, 487.
3Ibid., VI, 497.
4Hunter, "The Pathfinders of Jefferson County," Ohio Archaeolog-
ical and Historical Society Publications, VI, 271.
5Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, March 1, 1823.
6Ibid., March 22, 1823.
7Ibid., April 24, 1824.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 163
February, 1824, he said: "As I have told you before the north-
western states will go for Mr. Adams, if they cannot get me.
They will vote for no man residing in a slave state but me,
and they vote for me because of other and chiefly local con-
siderations, outweighing the slave objections. On that you may
depend."8 This was doubtless true at this time. The Jackson
movement had not yet developed great strength, and its partial
success in the Northwest at the election must be attributed
largely to Jackson's personal popularity and to the fact that
Clay had to face two candidates in each of these states. With
the slavery issue more prominent Jackson would probably have
been injured more than Clay in the North.
With the absence of any further events to stir up the
slavery question and with economic interests demanding to be
taken care of, tariff and internal improvements became the
dominating issues, or rather issue, as they were usually taken
together to form one policy known as the "domestic policy".
For some years prior to 1824 there had been a growing
demand in the West for legislation by the national govern-
ment to provide for western interests. With increasing agri-
cultural production, very inadequate and unsatisfactory markets,
and general business depression in the early twenties, Ohio and
her neighbors came to regard their future as inseparably con-
nected with internal improvements and a protective tariff.
The cost of transportation over the mountains restricted
the eastern market. New Orleans, the principal outlet of the
West, had serious disadvantages. The voyage down the Mis-
sissippi and back was long and difficult, navigation was unsafe
due to obstructions in the river, the climate was not healthful.
Shippers in the northwestern states had to wait until there was
sufficient water in the Ohio and upper Mississippi, which caused
all shipments to be made at one time and thus flooded the New
Orleans market, so injuring prices that often Ohio farmers
preferred to let their produce go to waste at home. The falls
of the Ohio at Louisville offered a further disadvantage. On
the other hand, the eastern market could be reached only through
8Clay, Works, IV, 86.
164 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
a national system of roads and canals. The Cumberland road
had reached Ohio, the Erie canal was nearing completion in
New York, and a Chesapeake and Ohio canal was under dis-
cussion. Ohio desired to take advantage of new routes to the
East by a system of canals which would connect the interior
counties with the Ohio River and Lake Erie and thus enable
them to make use of both the Ohio river outlet to the South
and the Erie canal to the East. Extensive preparations were
being made for the proposed canal system in Ohio and the
assistance of the federal government was especially desired.
Furthermore, the southern part of the state was interested in
a proposed canal around the falls of the Ohio. Hence internal
improvements became a kind of obsession with the people of
Ohio and visions of wonderful prosperity floated before them.
Closely connected with this was the tariff question. The
development of home manufactures through the tariff in order
to furnish a home market for agricultural products and make
the United States economically self-sustainng was a western
ideal. This would relieve the unprofitableness of agriculture,
diversify industries, open new channels for capital and labor,
and the whole country would profit thereby. Internal improve-
ments would enable the products to reach the markets cheaply,
the tariff would enlarge these markets by furnishing new de-
mands for raw materials and food supplies.
Ohio newspapers were full of articles showing the necessity
of such a policy. "Unless the western country can prevail upon
the government to provide means for transporting its surplus
agricultural produce to a certain and safe market, and unless
their manufactures be so protected as to be placed on a per-
manent footing, property will continue to depreciate, and poverty
and misery will be our constant companions,"9 said the Steuben-
ville Gazette. The picture of conditions in Ohio as seen by the
Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette was depressing. Ordinary
channels of wealth were overcrowded, professions full, com-
peting merchants and shopkeepers driving each other into bank-
ruptcy, agriculture overcrowded and declining. In the fall and
9Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, Feb. 7, 1824.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 165
winter of 1822-3 most of the provisions shipped from the Cin-
cinnati market involved almost all shippers in loss; in the winter
of 1823-4 shipments of provisions were nearly one-half less than
those of the previous year; land sales had greatly fallen off. If
the markets of the European wars could be brought back, said
the editorial, industry would revive; but that situation would
not likely recur soon again, and now Europe was feeding her-
self. In the United States eighty-three out of every hundred
persons were farmers raising a surplus. The remedy, then,
concluded the article, must be a large and permanent home mar-
ket, and this could only come by increasing duties to foster
manufactures and to furnish new openings for labor.10
With such sentiments so general it is not surprising that
Ohio felt such an interest in the presidential election. Congress,
it was felt, was favorably disposed toward the West11 but ex-
tensive plans for internal improvements had been checked by
the executive. Monroe was tolerated rather than liked. His
administration received some praise in general terms, but for
the most part the end of his term was awaited with impatience
by westerners, who desired the succession of a man with fewer
The Cincinnati National Republican declared that there was
no hope for national aid to internal improvements during the
Monroe administration. "There is a party of politicians at
Washington, whose consciences are so tender, or whose minds
are so contracted, that no general system of internal improve-
ments can be anticipated, from the councils of the nation, until
there is a radical change in the Executive department."12 A
little earlier this same paper expressed similar sentiments on
the tariff bill then before Congress, whose failure it attributed
to the influence of the treasury department. "How long we
shall be compelled to suffer by the contracted view of our public
interests, which can embrace only the growth of cotton and
tobacco, and the necessary means to provide for these articles,
10 Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, May 18, 1824.
11Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, March 25, 1824.
12Cincinnati National Republican, July 23, 1823.
166 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
a profitable foreign market, we pretend not to say; but we in-
dulge a hope, that the proceedings of the present Congress will
awaken a spirit of universal inquiry among the people, and
produce such a change in the federal administration, as will
ensure to it that wisdom which can discern the necessities of
the country, and that liberality of feeling which will prompt to
the adoption of the most efficient measures for its relief."13
It was all-important, therefore, that the next administration
be favorable to western interests. The candidate Ohio supported
must above all else be an advocate of the domestic policy. Said
the Cincinnati Gazette: "So far as we have been able to learn
the sentiments 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."14
Other papers uttered similar sentiments. The Steubenville
Gazette declared that "the question is not now whether this can-
didate or that candidate is a democrat or a federalist, but
whether he is a friend or an opponent to domestic industry and
internal improvements."15 As the Chillicothe Supporter and
Scioto Gazette, ardently for Clay, expressed it, "this 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
With this "article of faith" in view, the chances of the
various candidates may now be considered. William H. Craw-
ford, the Secretary of the Treasury, was at first regarded as the
leading candidate by the nation generally but he did not have
the slightest chance at any time of carrying Ohio. The fact that
he was most strongly supported in the southern states where
tariff and internal improvements were most unpopular was alone
enough to condemn him. His silence on these questions com-
13 Cincinnati National Republican, March 4, 1823.
14Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, Jan. 6, 1824.
15Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, in Scioto Gazette, Aug.
16Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Aug. 2, 1823.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 167
pleted his destruction in the west. The fact that he was from
a slave state and the supposed intrigues in which he was engaged
for the presidency were further counts against him. His few
supporters in Ohio were largely personal friends and, in the
absence of a Crawford electoral ticket, supported Clay.
The other southern candidate was Calhoun, the death of
Lowndes giving him South Carolina's united backing. He was
quite favorably regarded in Ohio despite the fact that he was
from a slave state. His advocacy of national measures, espe-
cially internal improvements, won him many supporters in Ohio
and early in the campaign he seemed to have a chance in the
state. But Calhoun could not compete with Clay in advocating
tariff and internal improvements while the latter had the further
advantage of being a westerner. His candidacy overshadowed
Henry Clay was the leading candidate in Ohio almost from
the beginning. He was a westerner, a strong advocate of both
protective tariff and internal improvements, and a champion of
western interests. He was well known personally in Ohio and
had a host of friends in the state. On the vital issues there was
no man whose sentiments were better known or more strongly
expressed. Indeed, Clay made himself so acceptable to the West
that he ruined his cause in the other sections. But to Ohioans
there were at least two important objections to Clay as their
candidate, namely, his attitude toward the Missouri Compromise
and his connection with the United States Bank, which was un-
popular in the state. His apparently southern views on the
Missouri question aroused considerable opposition to him at first
but declined in importance as the campaign progressed. His
position as attorney for the United States Bank injured him in
certain localities, yet the opposition on this score was not wide-
spread. Certain political charges raised against him proved to
be as important as these objections just mentioned.
Adams as the northern candidate drew to his support in Ohio
those opponents of slavery who believed in the necessity of elect-
ing a northern president to end the long monopoly the South had
maintained over the executive department. As the state of Ohio
was practically unanimous against the extension of slavery, in
168 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
the absence of other issues, Adams might well have succeeded
in carrying the state in 1824, as Clay's friends at first greatly
feared. But the domestic policy as the dominant issue worked
injury to Adams. His apparent silence on this question was
misconstrued in many quarters as opposition to tariff and internal
improvements and played an important part in the election.
DeWitt Clinton never announced himself as a candidate be-
cause his own state would not support him but he was regarded
as a possible candidate up to the time the electoral bill failed
in the New York legislature. In Ohio Clinton found strong
support. He was from a northern state, as Adams was. But
unlike the latter, he was known as the great apostle of internal
improvements, for the Erie canal was largely his work. Thus
Clinton seemed to many Ohioans to be the one candidate who
could draw western support from Clay and northern support
from Adams, and unite the two sections behind him for the in-
terests of both. The Ohio movement for Clinton had a real
popular basis, and had New York appeared favorable to her
native son, he would have run a very strong race in the
Andrew Jackson was not taken seriously in Ohio at first but
his personal popularity drew to him a party which grew as the
campaign progressed until it seemed as if Ohio would be swept
away by the magic name of Jackson. But it would be a mistake
to assume that the Jackson party had only a personal basis. Its
candidate was proclaimed as the strong advocate of western in-
terests as well as democracy, and though his stand on the tariff
and internal improvements was rather uncertain compared with
Clay's attitude, it satisfied his supporters who demanded a united
West back of him.
From this general survey of the candidates it is seen that
Ohio was drawn two ways. The Clay men, and after them the
Jackson followers, urged the necessity of a united West behind
a western candidate to secure the triumph of western interests,
which, they asserted, were, after all, the true national interests.
This union of all the western states appealed strongly to the
people of Ohio but was open to a serious objection which the
Ohio Monitor, friendly to Adams, set forth early in the campaign.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 169
It declared that the idea of a western sectional alignment was
delusive, that the division would be northern and southern, as
the North required protection to agriculture and manufactures
while the South opposed such a policy. Then the editorial went
at the heart of the question. "If a western interest is intended
to effect the election of a president, as is proposed by all who
speak of the feasibility of electing a western president, it must
include all the southern states, and one or more of the middle
states, and if a western candidate is elected by such votes he
must be governed by their policy."17 In other words the western
states were not strong enough to elect their own candidate on
such a frankly sectional platform as Clay's, while southern votes
could only be secured at the sacrifice of those interests most
vital to the West.
Ohio's other alternative was a union with the states to the
east of her on the basis of their common interests in regard to
slavery, the tariff, and internal improvements. Both Adams from
New England and Clinton from New York were prospective
northern candidates. If a union were to be effected between
Ohio and her western neighbors and the East, then one section
would have to give up its favorite candidate. That the former
as the younger and less populous should yield to the older section,
was the argument of the Adams and Clinton men.18 "The west",
said the Steubenville Gazette, "has no interest distinct from the
interest of the grain growing and manufacturing states to the
east."19 But however true this may have been, there could be
no agreement on the candidate they were to support in common.
Since the states in each section found it impossible to agree on
a single candidate for their section, it was too much to expect
the two sections to unite. The results of the election showed this.
Yet in the House election of 1825 it was just such a union
of West and East as this proposed one that elevated John Quincy
Adams to the presidency. Had it been effected before the election
of 1824 it might have produced happier consequences for all
17 Ohio Monitor, Feb. 15, 1823.
18Delaware Patron, Mar. 18, 1824.
19Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, Mar. 1, 1823.
170 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
The chief interest of the Ohio campaign lies in this struggle
between northern and western candidates and the attempted union
THE PRELIMINARY CAMPAIGN.
The campaign of 1824 in Ohio may be said to have begun
with the legislative caucus early in 1823. Prior to this time
there was no definite alignment of parties though newspapers
advocating their favorites were having preliminary skirmishes.
When the legislature met in December, 1822, it was seen that
sentiment was nearly equally divided for and against a legisla-
tive caucus to nominate a presidential candidate. Henry Clay
had just been nominated by the Kentucky legislature1 and his
friends were anxious to see the Ohio legislature take similar
action. An attempt made early in the session failed as it was
deemed inexpedient to take action so long before the election.
But the friends of Clay in Congress were very urgent that the
Ohio legislature take action. "The idea of some holding back
in expectation that Clinton will be brought forward is most
extraordinary," wrote Representative Barber, who urged Clay's
nomination and declared that the contest lay between Crawford
and Clay in the country at large.2 Representative David Trimble
of Kentucky, writing to Allen Trimble, then speaker of the Ohio
Senate, urged immediate action. "All depends upon Ohio, but
it is especially necessary that she should express her mind by
some mode that will leave no doubt of her intentions. A state
caucus, or something like that. Think of this seriously, and if
you do anything, the sooner the better."3
The Clay men worked energetically and succeeded in having
a caucus called for January 3, 1823. Of the 102 members of the
legislature about 90 were present. Speaker Trimble presided. A
motion that it was inexpedient to proceed to make a nomination
1Frankfort (Ky.) Argus, in Columbus Gazette, Dec. 5, 1822.
2Cutler, Life and Times of Ephraim Cutler, 182.
3Papers of Gov. Allen Trimble, Old Northwest Genealogical Quar-
terly, X, 301.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 171
at that time was voted down by the close vote of 43 to 47.
Whereupon most of the friends of the other candidates withdrew
and left the Clay men in control. A vote was then taken on the
presidential question, Clay receiving 50, Clinton 5, Adams 1,
The Clay men were much pleased with their success, the
Columbus Gazette claiming that many of those who had opposed
a nomination at that time and had withdrawn from the caucus
were friends of Clay.5 Henry Clay, himself, who arrived in
Columbus a few days after the holding of the caucus, wrote to
Francis Brooke expressing his satisfaction with the result. "Con-
sidering the great efforts made from without to prevent any legis-
lative expression of public opinion, the proof which is afforded
by the vote here is extremely strong."6
Naturally, the supporters of other candidates were dis-
pleased at the action of the legislators. It was declared pre-
mature and inexpedient,7 and not deserving any consideration
since Clay had obtained only fifty votes, less than half of the
membership of the legislature, despite all the efforts made by
The Ohio nomination certainly added prestige to Clay's
cause in the state and elsewhere, but it had a tendency to turn
the fire of the supporters of all the other candidates against
him, while the circumstances of the nomination led to charges
of intrigue and disregard of public sentiment, which were
repeated and enlarged until they came to be urged as one
of the principal reasons why Clay should be defeated. The
Jackson press especially delighted to compare the popular
nomination of Jackson with the caucus endorsement of Clay,
which was classed with the very unpopular congressional
caucus as means by which intriguing politicians subverted the
4Columbus Gazette, Jan. 9, 1823; Ohio Monitor, Jan. 4, 1823.
5 Columbus Gazette, Jan. 9, 1823.
6 Clay, Works, IV, 70.
7John McLean to Allen Trimble, Jan. 31, 1823, Papers of Gov. Allen
Trimble, Old Northwest Genealogical Quarterly, X, 302.
8 Cincinnati National Republican, Jan. 14, 1823; March 4, 1823.
172 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
At about the same time the legislators were taking action
at Columbus, a movement of another sort was in progress
at Cincinnati. On December 24, 1822, a poplar meeting was
held to express a presidential preference. A preliminary meet-
ing on December 7 had appointed a committee to consider the
various candidates, and this committee reported to the meet-
ing of the 24th. The report recommended DeWitt Clinton
for the presidency. The resolution as adopted pointed out the
importance and mutual interdependence of agriculture, com-
merce, and manufactures, the necessity of their protection
and fostering care by the government, and the need of a
chief executive who should be free from contracted views and
local prejudices; declared that DeWitt Clinton possessed the
necessary attainments including liberal and enlightened views
of national policy to qualify him for the high office; and
recommended him to the people of Ohio and the Union as a
candidate. Legislative nominations were disapproved of,
and committees of correspondence were formed to further
Clinton's cause. More than three hundred attended the meet-
ing and only three negative votes were cast on the resolutions,
according to a friendly newspaper.9
This was the beginning of the Clinton movement in Ohio
which for a time caused much uneasiness in the Clay follow-
ing and not without cause. Clinton was strong in two sections
of the state where Clay was weak. Around Cincinnati Clay's
connection with the United States Bank had injured him
while Clinton, the friend of internal improvements, was highly
regarded. In the northern and eastern parts of the state
Clinton was popular because he was both a free state man
and a friend to roads and canals while Clay's slavery views
were distrusted by the people there, who were largely from
northern states. The Cincinnati National Republican in its
advocacy of Clinton put special emphasis on his friendliness
to internal improvements. The Western Herald and Steuben-
ville Gazette in the other section of the state urged his candi-
dacy first of all because he was a northerner and opposed to
9Cincinnati National Republican, Jan. 1, 1823.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 173
the extension of slavery. Thus he possessed the chief elements
of strength of both Adams and Clay without their weaknesses.
His cause was warmly advocated by at least two important
newspapers while some others, apparently for Adams, were
quite friendly. The Delaware Patron, an Adams paper, openly
expressed its belief that Clinton could carry the state but de-
clared his election out of question because he was not con-
sidered in his own state.10
Through the spring and summer of 1823 the Clinton move-
ment made little progress, largely because New York was not
favorable, but late in the year a concerted movement for him
took place in Ohio which for a time made him a strong rival
of Clay and Adams. This can best be taken up in another
The Adams following in the state, while not so large as
Clay's in numbers, was not easily drawn to other candidates.
Composed largely of former New Englanders, this party clung
tenaciously to the New England candidate and made ability,
integrity, morality, and opposition to slavery its chief tenets
while at the same time asserting its candidate's friendliness to
protective tariff and internal improvements. Those to whom
opposition to slavery seemed of first importance joined the
Adams movement making the Secretary of State a strong can-
didate throughout the whole Northwest.
An attempt had been made in 1822 to discredit Adams in
the West by the publication of the Russell letters in which it
was charged that Adams had proposed at Ghent in 1814 to
grant to Great Britain the right of navigating the Mississippi
in return for the use of the Newfoundland fisheries by the
Americans. 11 Adams successfully refuted the charge but it
aroused him against Clay, whom he thought responsible.
Writing of this in his diary, he said, "Clay's conduct through-
out this affair towards me has been that of an envious rival--
a fellow-servant whispering tales into the ear of a common
master. He has been seven years circulating this poison against
10Delaware Patron, in the Ohio Monitor, May 3, 1823.
Niles' Register, XXII, 198, 209, 220, 296, 327; XXIII, 6, 9.
174 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
me in the West, and I have now no doubt that Russell's letter
was brought forth upon suggestions originating with him."12
Adams was more friendly to Calhoun, and Clay to Crawford at
this time. Clay was partially drawn into the Russell affair
by a letter 13 he wrote denying certain statements make by
Adams but offering no proof because, he said, he did not desire
to get into a controversy with him.14 Adams demanded com-
plete proof15 but Clay refused to enter further into the affair.
His action did him no good, and even his friends thought it
unwise that he should have written the letter at all.16 The
charge raised by Russell was used against Adams in the Ohio
campaign but played a very minor part as the latter's able de-
fense had deprived it of its importance. His opponents found
a more effective means to discredit him in Ohio. The whole
affair only served to make a wider gap between Adams and
Clay, which was unfortunate for both.
Considering the long period until the election would take
place the year 1823 was surprisingly full of presidential politics.
Charges and countercharges were hurled back and forth by
ardent partisans. In Ohio the Clay men had to bear the brunt
of the attack because of the leading position Clay was holding
and because of the prestige the legislative nomination had given
him as Ohio's candidate.
The National Republican of Cincinnati took the lead in at-
tacking caucus nominations, whether congressional or state.
It regarded Clay in an unfriendly light and attacked Crawford
as the prince of intriguers. Calhoun was declared to be too
young and lacking in the experience of statesmanship.17 Jack-
son was praised for his great services to the country, but was
declared utterly unfit for the presidency as his talents were
those of a soldier. His advocates were urged to cease their
12J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, VI, 49.
13J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, VI, 116; Cincinnati National Republican,
Jan. 7, 1823.
14 Clay to Brooke, Jan. 8, 1823, Works of Clay, IV, 70.
15J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, VI, 117.
16 Clay to Brooke, Jan. 31, 1823, Works of Clay, IV, 71.
Cincinnati National Republican, March 14, 1823.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 175
officious efforts.18 Yet, curiously enough, in less than a year
this same paper was strongly urging the election of Jackson.
But the National Republican was not the only paper guilty
of changing its politics. The Steubenville Gazette was so
bitter against the southern states and any candidate from that
section that the Scioto Gazette was led to advise the Steuben-
ville editor, James Wilson, to go forth and preach a crusade
against the "southrons".19 Yet before many months had passed
the fiery editor had come out for Clay, admitting that slavery
would play little part in the election.20
The Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette favored Calhoun
but at his withdrawal went over to Clay.21 There was no in-
consistency in this, however, as both Clay and Calhoun were
regarded as friendly to internal improvements and the tariff,
and this paper put these issues above all others.
These are only examples of the shifting of party groups
in the state before the contest became definitely limited.
A proposal of an eastern paper, made early in the cam-
paign, to run Governor Morrow or former Governor Worth-
ington for vice-president was looked upon unfavorably by the
Clay leaders as an attempt to secure Ohio's support to Adams
by an offer of the second place to the western state. The Scioto
Gazette declared that the people of Ohio were determined to sup-
port Henry Clay for president and that nothing but "the act
of God" could induce them to alter their resolution.22 This
rash statement returned to plague its author again and again
during the closely fought campaign. The suggestion of an
Ohio man for the vice-presidency dropped out of sight, finding
little support anywhere.
Late in 1823 the Clinton movement took on renewed life.
The National Republican in a significant editorial urged the peo-
ple of the middle states and the west to put an end to the
Cincinnati National Republican, May 6, 1823; May 13, 1823.
19 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Aug. 2, 1823.
20Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, April 24, 1823.
21Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, March 5, 1824.
22 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, in the Columbus Ga-
zette, June 5, 1823.
176 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
intrigues and cabals and factional strife and unite on a candi-
date, DeWitt Clinton, who was decidedly the most popular in
Ohio. The West would yield the "partialities of personal at-
tachment" to higher considerations.23
On December 2, a large meeting of Jefferson county citizens
held at Steubenville nominated Clinton for president and Andrew
Jackson for vice-president.24 The National Republican on the
same day announced that New York would support Clinton
and that he would be a candidate, 25 an assertion at variance
with the real situation. On December 16 a public meeting was
held at Cincinnati to name a presidential candidate, Mayor Bur-
net presiding. The crowd proved so large that the building
could not hold it. The Steubenville resolutions were adopted
and Clinton named for the presidency by a vote of 450 for him
to 330 for all other candidates.26
The Cincinnati meeting aroused much enthusiasm among the
Clinton followers and plans were immediately set on foot to
hold a meeting at Columbus early in January which would be
more than a local expression of sentiment. The meeting, when
held, did not prove to be a Clinton endorsement affair at all.
About four-fifths of those present were from Columbus and
vicinity, and were more inclined towards Clay than Clinton.
After much hot debating, especially over slavery charges
directed against Clay, the meeting voted to adjourn without
making a nomination. The Clinton followers desired to re-
main and nominate their candidate but the confusion became
so great that they were forced to give up the attempt.27 The
National Republican charged the Clay men with adjourning
the meeting to prevent Clinton's nomination since Clay could
not have received a majority.28
The Columbus meeting injured the Clinton movement and
23National Republican, Sept. 19, 1823.
24Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, Dec. 4, 1823.
25National Republican, Dec. 2, 1823.
26Ibid., Dec. 19, 1823.
27 Columbus Gazette, Jan. 15, 1824; Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Ga-
zette, Jan. 20, 1824.
28 National Republican, Jan. 27, 1824.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 177
gave opposing papers an opportunity to cast ridicule upon it.29
But the decline of the movement was not due to this failure
but to the very apparent fact that Clinton had never an-
nounced himself a candidate and that New York had shown
little enthusiasm for him. A few other Clinton meetings
were held in Ohio30 but his cause was declining. The Western
Herald and Steubenville Gazette early in February admitted
that Clinton's chances were doubtful.31 The National Repub-
lican would not concede his cause hopeless until news came
of the failure of the bill in the New York legislature to pro-
vide for popular election of the presidential electors.32 This
doomed the Clinton movement as the New York legislature,
which chose the electors, was completely dominated by Van
Buren and his friends, who were hostile to Clinton. The
National Republican blamed the Clay men in New York for
the defeat of the electoral bill33 and grew increasingly hostile
to Clay, eventually declaring for Jackson.
On April 1O the Clinton committee of correspondence at
Cincinnati formally dissolved.34 Of the ten members seven
declared for Clay, three for Jackson. The Cincinnati Gazette
declared that the majority of the Clinton men followed the
majority of the committee and joined the Clay forces, but the
remarkable growth of the Jackson strength around Cincinnati
seems to indicate that Jackson benefited most by Clinton's
failure there. The movement for Clinton was an ambitious
project to unite New York and perhaps New England with
the Northwest but it failed because local considerations were
too strong in each case. Thus Adams was left as the only
northern candidate to compete for Ohio's vote with two western
candidates. This necessitates a brief account of the disap-
29 Scioto Gazette, Jan. 17, 1824; Hamilton Intelligencer and Adver-
tiser, Jan. 27, Feb. 17, 1824; Cincinnati Gazette, Jan. 20, 1824.
30National Republican, Feb. 13, Feb. 24; Cincinnati Gazette, Feb.
31 Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, Feb. 7.
32 National Republican, April 9, 1824.
33 Ibid., April 9, April 13, April 16, 1824.
34 National Republican, April 13; Cincinnati Gazette, April 16.
178 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
pearance of the Calhoun party, for Calhoun was still in the
race in the early months of 1824.
Calhoun was popular in Ohio because of his strong stand
for internal improvements but he was never a leading candidate.
With Clay in the field he could hardly hope to win the state's
electoral votes from the great western advocate of the domestic
policy. Still his friends kept up the fight in his behalf and
had several newspapers quite friendly to his cause. So long
as he had a chance to carry Pennsylvania, Calhoun was given
consideration in Ohio. Neither the Adams nor the Clay men
were very hostile to him, as each probably had hopes of eventu-
ally securing the support of his followers in case his chances
did not warrant a contest in the state. The Scioto Gazette
did, however, question whether Calhoun's tariff sentiments
were exactly in unison with those of Pennsylvania and the
West though it gave approval to his past career.35
The National Republican, favoring Clinton, was hostile to
Calhoun. It declared him not qualified in age, experience, or
public service,36 and later charged him with trying to supplant
Adams whom it was supposed he would ultimately support.37
It referred to him as "a man of second-rate talents, although
of first-rate pretentions."38 and when his withdrawal was an-
nounced declared he had never had any real popularity and
was just discovering the fact himself.39 Yet this same paper
was soon obliged to give Calhoun its hearty support for the
vice-presidency on the Jackson ticket.
Calhoun's leading Ohio supporter was William McLean, the
Postmaster General. He was quite active in urging Calhoun's
claims40 and was much disappointed at the action of the Ohio
legislators in naming Clay as their choice.41 But his activities
35Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Feb. 26, 1824.
36 National Republican, March 14, 1823.
37 National Republican, Jan. 9, 1824.
38 Ibid., Jan. 13, 1824.
39Ibid., March 5, 1824.
40Trimble, "Memoirs of an Old Politician," Jour. of Amer. History,
41McLean to Trimble, Jan. 31, 1823, Papers of Gov. Allen Trimble,
Old Northwest Genealogical Quarterly, X, 302.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 179
subjected him to some criticism, especially his use of the mails
for Calhoun pamphlets and newspapers.42 The declaration of
the Harrisburg convention in Pennsylvania for Jackson led to
Calhoun's withdrawal. His leading newspaper in Ohio, the
Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, went over to Clay as the
champion of the domestic policy and the Calhoun movement
quietly dissolved. The race in the state was now between
Adams, Clay and Jackson.
In national politics the most important event of the early
campaign was the holding of the congressional caucus in Feb-
ruary, 1824, which named William H. Crawford as the Repub-
lican candidate for the presidency.43 The caucus was very un-
popular in Ohio and the West. Western democracy was very
bitter against the selection of a presidential candidate by mem-
bers of Congress as this meant to westerners intrigue and cor-
ruption and perversion of the people's will. The fact that
Crawford, most disliked of all candidates in the West, was
the beneficiary of the caucus only added fuel to the flame. In
Ohio, even the Clay papers, which had been rather friendly to
Crawford, joined in the general denunciation of the sixty-six
members of Congress who had dared to hold a caucus. Only
one Ohio man, Benjamin Ruggles, United States Senator, at-
tended the caucus, and he was chosen its chairman. For this
he brought down upon himself an avalanche of criticism, which
for a time threatened to blast his political career.
A few extracts from leading newspapers will show how in-
tense feeling was against the caucus and its nominee. The Na-
tional Republican called it "the second edition of the Hartford
convention" and declared its members were principally apostate
Federalists.44 The Delaware Patron, an Adams organ, ex-
pressed its gratification that "amidst all the blandishments of
intriguers and the arts of corruptionists, but one member of
the Ohio delegation has been seduced from the path of duty,
42Columbus Gazette, Feb. 26, Mar. 11, Mar. 25, 1824; Cincinnati
Advertiser, Jan. 10, 1824.
43Washington Republican, in Hamilton Intelligencer, Mar. 2, 1824.
44 National Republican, Feb. 27, 1824.
180 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
to the imminent hazard of his popularity and usefulness."45 The
Columbus Gazette, a Clay paper, declared the conduct of Mr.
Ruggles "at variance with that of the balance of our representa-
tion in Congress, and also with that of the great body of the
people of this state."46 Clay himself was quite aroused and
wrote to Brooke that "the miserable attempt at a caucus" would
destroy whatever prospects Crawford had.47
The only expression of sentiment favorable to the caucus
was a public meeting at Zanesville held to indorse its action.
But the opponents of the caucus controlled the meeting and the
few favorable to it were forced to withdraw to another room
where they passed resolutions approving the action of the
caucus.48 The failure of this attempted indorsement only caused
further ridicule and showed how impossible it was for Crawford
to expect any support in Ohio.
All discussion of the Crawford candidacy could be omitted
from this account of the Ohio campaign were it not for its rela-
tions to the Clay candidacy and the threatening complications
which resulted therefrom; for Clay's opponents capitalized the
unpopularity of Crawford in the state and used it with effect
against Clay. But this will be taken up in connection with the
PARTIES AND CONVENTIONS.
The Ohio campaign was now definitely limited to Adams,
Clay, and Jackson. The rise of the Jackson movement needs
to be explained as it was the most striking political phenomenon
of the spring of 1824. The candidacy of Andrew Jackson had
previously aroused little attention in Ohio, and though it found
some newspaper support, in general it was not taken seriously.
Adams and Clay were the leading candidates with Clinton
45Delaware Patron, Mar. 4, 1824.
46Columbus Gazette, Feb. 26, 1824.
47 Clay, Works, IV, 86.
48 Ohio Republican, Mar. 6, in Scioto Gazette, Mar. 11; Steubenville
Gazette, Mar. 13.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 181
threatening and Calhoun a kind of second-choice favorite of
the Clay and Adams men. But the democratic character of the
Jacksonian movement and the personal popularity of the "old
hero" could not help but make a strong appeal to the west,
and with the decline of Clinton and Calhoun this became very
In Cincinnati the trend toward Jackson was surprisingly
strong. The Cincinnati Advertiser had been urging Jackson's
cause but it was joined in April by the National Republican, thus
giving the Jackson men two influential newspapers in their sup-
port. The nomination of Jackson by the Harrisburg convention
had caused much jubilation and, coming at the same time as
the failure of the Clinton and Calhoun movements, raised the
hopes of the Jackson men in Ohio to a high pitch. Jackson
meetings were held in some counties in April to forward his
candidacy.1 A Cincinnati meeting on April 17 proved rather
small compared with the large Clinton meeting of the previous
December2 but it was the beginning of the Jackson organization
In May the Jackson corresponding committee of Cincinnati
and Hamilton county issued an address3 which was the first
general statement of the principles of Jacksonian democracy in
Ohio. It attacked the system of appointing members of Con-
gress to offices in the administration as a source of danger;
declared that "ill-founded constitutional scruples" had intervened
to prevent appropriations for national purposes, while truly un-
constitutional measures were pursued with avidity when it suited
those in power, that talent and respectability had no weight in
securing offices in opposition to executive favor; and demanded
a thorough reformation. It declared that the situation called
for a man who "will always consider talent and integrity the
only qualifications for promotion", "whose mind has never been
contaminated with the corruption of foreign courts, nor seduced
by the etiquette of the minions of arbitrary power-who pro-
motes and encourages the manufactures of his own country, and
National Republican, April 27.
2Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, April 20.
3National Republican, May 18.
182 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
was never duped by the wily insinuations of foreign ministers;
the man who never linked himself in with the corruptionists
of the day, nor put himself forth for public office in any case
but where his services were essential to the safety and welfare of
the nation." It closed with a stirring appeal to the uncorrupted
part of the community to support the savior of his country,
called forth like the great Cincinnatus of old to save the nation.
This was the war cry of Jacksonian democracy, the appeal
to the people. But it is to be noticed that the address did not
neglect the questions of the domestic policy, for it is to be
doubted whether the appeal would have gotten very far had
Jackson been suspected of unfriendliness to the fundamental
western interests. Nevertheless the Jackson campaign was based
first of all on the popularity of Jackson, other issues being rather
On May 29 the Jackson committee called a convention to
be held at Columbus on July 14 to form a Jackson electoral
ticket.4 Meanwhile friends of the other candidates had not been
idle. Both Clay and Adams electoral tickets had appeared.
The Columbus Gazette of March 25 printed for the first
time a list of Clay electors headed by William Henry Harrison
and former Governor Thomas Kirker, and containing the names
of a number of members of the last legislature. This ticket had
been agreed upon the previous winter by friends of Clay at Co-
lumbus, principally members of the legislature. It was imme-
diately attacked as a Crawford ticket in disguise,6 as the work
largely of a leading Federalist, and as containing former Federal-
ists on it.7
The leading Federalist referred to was Charles Hammond,
campaign manager for Clay in Ohio. Because of his prominence
in the campaign Hammond deserves some notice here. He had
come to Ohio in 181O, a young lawyer of Maryland birth, but
became editor of the Ohio Federalist at St. Clairsville, arousing
much feeling against himself by opposing the war of 1812. After
4 Cincinnati Advertiser, June 2.
5Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, April 15.
6National Republican, March 30, April 2.
7Ohio Monitor, in Hamilton Intelligencer, April 20.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 183
this he served in the legislature for several years, became supreme
court reporter, and, because of his unusual ability, was retained
as attorney for the state in the famous case of Osborn vs. The
Bank of the United States, when Ohio attempted to tax the
Bank. He was pitted against Clay, counsel for the Bank, but
felt no personal animosities and in 1824 became his political ad-
viser and campaign manager. Although the son of a slave-holder,
Hammond was nevertheless a strong opponent of slavery and
would have favored Adams in 1824 but for the latter's desertion
of the Federalist party years before. Nominally becoming a Re-
publican after his party's disappearance, Hammond really re-
mained a Federalist at heart. He disliked Jackson very much
and continued to oppose him until he retired from public life.8
With headquarters at Cincinnati, the heart of the Jackson
territory, Hammond directed Clay's campaign with skill and
moderation though subjected to bitter attacks personally. His
letters to the newspapers, especially the Liberty Hall and Cincin-
nati Gazette, of which he later became publisher, show a clear
perception of the true situation of the Clay forces and how it
was to be met.
The Clay electoral ticket had hardly appeared before an
Adams ticket was also published. On February 18 the members
of the legislature friendly to Adams met, and after passing
resolutions expressing their determination to support a candidate
opposed to the slaveholding policy, recommended an Adams
electoral ticket and appointed a committee of correspondence.9
Calvin Pease, who had been chief justice of the supreme court,
headed the ticket. He had headed the Federalist electoral ticket
in 1812, a fact which the Clay men did not neglect to point out.10
The list of proposed electors contained several members of the
legislature, among them Nathaniel McLean, brother of that ardent
Calhoun leader, Postmaster General McLean.11
And now appears one of the strange features of the cam-
8Smith's Charles Hammond, 12-36; Mansfield, Personal Memories,
9Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, April 29.
10 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, April 29.
11 Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, May 20.
184 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
paign - the attempt of the Adams men to secure the support of
the Jackson following by making Jackson their vice-presidential
candidate. The plan was not confined to Ohio nor did it origi-
nate there. Adams himself was probably the one who suggested
the idea; at any rate it at once found favor with him. Southard,
his cabinet colleague, warned him that this might strengthen
Jackson for the presidency, but Adams believed the idea cor-
rect in principle and the vice-presidency especially suited to Jack-
son.l2 The plan was to unite Jackson and Calhoun with Adams
by giving Jackson the vice-presidency and Calhoun some place,
presumably in the cabinet, more suited to his youth and activity.
This would strengthen the coming administration against the ex-
pected alliance of Crawford and Clay and add to it the much
desired western support.13
The Adams men in Ohio took up the plan, and even before
their electoral ticket was published, the Delaware Patron carried
the names of Adams for president and Jackson for vice-president
at the head of its columns.14 With the appearance of the "Free
Electoral Ticket", as the Adams list was called, Jackson's name
appeared regularly as the vice-presidential candidate. A Cin-
cinnati Adams follower, much alarmed at Jackson's strength in
the Miami country, suggested a ticket pledged to Adams and
Jackson and free to vote for either for president as circumstances
should require.15 But the Adams men had no intention of thus
weakening their support of the New England candidate. They
continued to support Jackson for the second place until late in
the summer when his name was quietly dropped from the ticket.
This attempted union was doomed to failure because Jack-
son had shown too much strength as a presidential candidate to
be easily put into an inferior place. His followers were too con-
fident of success to be willing to unite themselves with the "aristo-
cratic candidate." Neither the Adams nor the Clay men in
12Adams, Memoirs, VI, 253.
13 P. P. F. DeGrand to Gen. Dearborn, Jan., 1824, Magazine of
Amer. Hist., VIII, 629.
14 Delaware Patron, April 8.
15 Cutler, Life and Times of Ephraim Cutler, 189, H. D. Ward to
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 185
Ohio seemed to have realized the strength of Jackson's follow-
ing and each hoped for its eventual union with themselves. The
Adams newspapers rather avoided attacking Jackson's candidacy
until late in the campaign when union was seen to be hopeless.
The Clay papers for the most part were quite conciliatory
toward Jackson and his supporters until it became evident that
he would not be withdrawn in Ohio. The Cincinnati Gazette,
facing two Jackson papers at Cincinnati, let loose at them rather
early, and in March was inviting General Jackson to expose the
supposed corruption in the national government and show what
was to be reformed.16 But it was in an exceptional situation.
Throughout most of the state newspapers were divided principally
between Clay and Adams and spent most of their time attacking
each other to the neglect of Jackson.
The Jackson presses were not at all lenient with Clay and
Adams, but, led by the National Republican, indulged in a cam-
paign of such abuse and vilification that Hammond formally pro-
tested through the Gazette against the attitude of the National
Republican and urged that the campaign be carried on without
indulging in personalities as there were real grounds of difference
between the candidates.17 His protest went unheeded, and as a
result, before the campaign was over, the Gazette and the Na-
tional Crisis, an Adams paper, were both attacking the Jackson
men with their own weapons. The fierce attacks of the Jackson
presses on their opponents and the fact that Jackson was the
leading candidate around Cincinnati had a tendency to draw the
Adams and Clay men somewhat more closely together there than
elsewhere. They did not cease their warfare, it is true, but they
did center their attacks on the Jackson party. The way was thus
made easier for their eventual union.
No Jackson electoral ticket was presented at the time the
other tickets appeared, but meetings were held in various counties
in May and June and certain individuals recommended as electors
in the different congressional districts. The Jackson men con-
trasted the popular character of these nominations with the man-
16 Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, March 19.
17 Ibid., May 21. Letter Signed "L."
186 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
ner in which the Clay and Adams tickets were prepared.18 The
final arrangement of the electoral ticket and the formal presenta-
tion of Jackson's candidacy were to be done by the state conven-
tion called by the Cincinnati Jackson committee.
This convention was to be composed of delegates chosen by
the people of the various counties. This was the nearest ap-
proach to a regularly constituted delegate nominating convention
that Ohio had yet seen. It was neither a state nor a national
nominating convention but a kind of state presidential ratifying
convention. It was one of the new political practices of Jack-
sonian democracy and was on the model of the Pennsylvania
Jackson convention at Harrisburg.
As it actually occurred the Ohio convention proved a deep
disappointment to the followers of Jackson. It met on July
14 but only a few delegates were present, variously estimated
at from eleven to thirty, with only eight or nine counties rep-
resented.19 It framed an electoral ticket and appointed a com-
mittee to prepare an address to the people. For some reason
the committee delayed publication of the address until Septem-
ber, but as it was a kind of Jackson platform it may be con-
sidered in connection with the convention
The address,20 after praising Jackson's integrity, patriotism,
and talents, proceeded to attack the principle of legislative nomi-
nations as an interference with popular elections and pointed out
as a horrible example of legislative domination the state of New
York, expressing the fear that Ohio would likewise become "the
sport of intriguing demagogues" and "subject to the wickedness
and distraction of an organized system of office brokerage, and
aristocratic domination." Both congressional and state caucuses
The system of cabinet succession to the presidency was as-
sailed because cabinet members through their power and use of
the patronage could create powerful parties in their favor. The
address declared that if either Adams or Crawford were success-
18Hamilton Intelligencer, June 15; National Republican, July 23.
19Columbus Gazette, July 22; Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette,
July 23; National Republican, July 23.
20Hamilton Intelligencer,Sept. 27, Oct. 4.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 187
ful the nation would be distracted with two contending parties,
"losing sight of the interests of the people in a virulent and selfish
contest for power." Hence, a man should be chosen, aloof from
intrigues and cabals, who would call into public service "the most
intelligent and virtuous part of the community."
Then it took up the question of Clay's candidacy. This was
greatly deplored as unfortunately producing a division among
those who entertained the same sentiments as to a national policy,
and Clay was urged to withdraw on the ground that there was no
reasonable expectation that he would receive sufficient support to
reach the House of Representatives. Another reason was that
he was much younger than his competitors and could easily wait,
and being from the same section as Jackson, should give way to
that hero and devoted patriot of two wars. Furthermore, the
time honored practice of selecting the president from the vener-
able sages of the nation should not be departed from. Jackson
the last of the Revolutionary patriots, without a congressional
caucus or cabinet influence to back him, was emphatically the
candidate of the people and should be chosen.
Part of the address was given over to a biography of the
candidate and a eulogy of his talents and abilities. Among other
things it was stated that "his views of public policy, as to inter-
nal improvements and protection to domestic manufactures,
eminently qualified him for the chief seat in our national coun-
cils." This rather equivocal statement contains the only direct
mention of the burning issues in connection with Jackson, al-
though his friendliness to the domestic policy is implied in several
In conclusion Jackson's prospects were set forth, 120 elec-
toral votes, including Ohio's 16, being claimed for him and,
in case of Clay's withdrawal, Missouri and Kentucky also, giving
him 137 votes, 6 more than a majority. If all remained in the
race and the election went to the House, the result would be im-
possible to foretell; "but from the general impression which pre-
vails, that that body would elect the candidate who had received
the greatest number of electoral vates, and not incur the respon-
sibility and obloquy of selecting one less popular with the people,
it is believed General Jackson would there be chosen." Thus
188 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
early appears the democratic theory of Benton and the other
Jackson men that it was the duty of the House merely to ratify
the popular will by choosing the candidate with the highest vote.
Calhoun was indorsed for the vice-presidency because of his ad-
vocacy of internal improvements and protection to manufactures.
This address of the Jackson committee shows very clearly the
nature of the appeal that was made for Jackson's election. It is
not his advocacy of any particular measure nor his stand on im-
portant issues but his personality, his services to the nation, his
democracy, and his freedom from intrigue and corruption that
are set forth in his behalf. Sectional feelings and great economic
questions are subordinated to a popular appeal for the election of
a popular man. Democracy was asserting its own importance.
The Jackson convention was not the only one held in Ohio.
Both the Clay men and the Adams folllowers held meetings at
Columbus in this same month which, while not strictly delegate
conventions in the sense that the Jackson assemblage was, were
quite similar to it in most respects.
On July 15 the friends of Henry Clay attending the sitting of
the Federal Court at Columbus held a public meeting to present
the claims of their favorite to the people.21 Though only an in-
formal meeting it was, nevertheless, more like a convention in
size and number of counties represented than the Jackson party's
convention. There were about 300 present and the meeting was
in charge of the three members of the central committee of cor-
respondence. The committee reported the written pledges of the
Clay electors to support Clay to the end. This was to offset the
charge that they were to be delivered to Crawford. Resolutions
were adopted by the meeting in favor of Clay for president and
Nathan Sanford of New York for vice-president, and a general
committee of one from each county was appointed. As the elec-
toral ticket had been prepared the preceding winter, the principal
business of the meeting was to issue an address, which, unlike the
Jackson statement, appeared at once.
It discussed the origins of Clay's candidacy, pointed out the
evils which reflecting men saw, as Monroe's retirement ap-
Columbus Gazette, July 22; Scioto Gazette, July 22, July 29.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 189
preached, in a struggle between members of the cabinet for the
presidency and the dangers of continuing "the same influence in
office, which virtually would be a departure from the maxim, that
rotation in office was essential to the preservation of the re-
public." Thus, on the principle that no member of the cabinet
should be chosen, attention was naturally directed to Henry Clay,
intimately acquainted with western needs, known to the nation as
a liberal, intelligent statesman and to the world as a fearless
American leader, successful at Ghent and the first to raise his
voice for South America. On these grounds, declared the ad-
dress, the citizens of the West determined to nominate him as
Monroe's successor, and they support that nomination on broad
national grounds, not sectional as has been asserted.
Then followed a paragraph setting forth Clay's strong ad-
vocacy of internal improvements at national expense and the pro-
tection of domestic industry together with an account of his work
to secure these objects.
Jackson's candidacy received consideration. The presence
of another candidate in the West supported with the same objects
in view was deeply regretted but the opinion was expressed that
"the diversion will be much less extensive and mischievous than
is by some supposed."
It is frankly admitted in the address that Clay's only hope
of election was through the House of Representatives but the
blame for this was placed upon the presence of another candi-
date from the West. It was denied that Clay's withdrawal
would result in an election by the electors or would mate-
rially change the situation, except possibly to place a member
of the cabinet in the presidential chair, "an event, which it
was the first object of the friends of Mr. Clay to prevent;
not in reference to the men, but to the principle."
Then followed a list of the states in which Clay had
strong hopes and a forecast of how Ohio would vote. Nathan
Sanford of New York, chancellor of that state and a former
United States senator, was put forward as Clay's running mate
on the ground that he was devoted to the same great national
In their opposition to cabinet succession to the presidency
190 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
both the Clay and Jackson addresses express similar sentiments
though the sentiments of the former are more restrained. As
to the need for a united West they are agreed; but as to
which candidate shall withdraw they disagree. But the Clay
address makes a very different kind of appeal to the voters.
Clay's election is urged because of what he has accomplished
as a statesman and what he is advocating. The economic and
sectional issues appear prominently in the address. It is more
concerned with the issues, the Jackson address with Jackson.
Soon after this meeting was held Clay himself arrived in
Columbus to attend the sitting of the Federal Court. His pres-
ence doubtless accounts in part for the large number of Clay
men in Columbus at this time. He was much pleased with the
general situation and wrote to J. S. Johnston that the evidence
derivable from popular meetings all over the state placed be-
yond all doubt the final result.22
The third meeting of this month was the Adams gather-
ing, held on the same evening as the Clay meeting by the friends
of Adams attendant on the Federal Court.23 It was called on
short notice and only a small number was present. But an
address was issued, nevertheless, calling upon the followers of
Adams to work harder and setting forth his claims to the presi-
dency. It began by charging the opposition, especially the Clay
partisans, with striving to create distrust in the Adams ranks
and causing them to lose confidence in their own strength. On
the vital question of Adams' attitude toward western interests,
the address said: "Prejudices were attempted to be excited
against Mr. Adams by representing him as being unfriendly
to the interests of the West. The whole tenor of his conduct
refutes the charge. We might retaliate on our opponents, that
under a pretense of advocating the rights of the West they are
advocating the interests of the slaveholding section of the
nation. But this is not our wish; we wish to create no sec-
tional feelings. We believe that Mr. Adams, if elected presi-
dent, will be in fact a president of all the states, that he will
22Clay to J. S. Johnston, July 21, 1824, Works of Clay, IV, 97.
23 Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, July 22.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 191
not become subservient to the views of any party of men or
the local interests, of any part of the public."
Then followed a forecast of the possibilities of Adams in
Ohio to show his followers that there was plenty of incentive
to action. Especially was encouragement derived from the
belief that Adams had the best chance in the electoral college
and that Ohio's vote would prevent a House election. Return-
ing to the question of western interests, the address declared
Adams a consistent supporter of internal improvements and
favorable to a protective tariff, and concluded with a statement
of his high qualification for the presidency.
As a whole the address gives the impression that the Adams
men were on the defensive and at a certain disadvantage. The
considerable space given to the issues of tariff and internal im-
provements shows the difficulties the Adams men were having
over these questions while their desire to see the slavery issue not
entirely overlooked is evident. It illustrated the strength and
the weakness of the Adams movement in Ohio.
With these meetings at Columbus and the addresses issued
by them the campaign entered on its final stages. It now be-
came a desperate scramble for votes and there was little in the
public or private life of a candidate that was overlooked. To
understand the importance of the questions raised and their in-
fluence upon the final result, a somewhat detailed consideration
of the campaigns carried on by the partisans of each candidate
THE CAMPAIGN FOR CLAY.
The Clay campaign was vitally connected with the interests
of the West. Clay's record, so far as these were concerned, could
not be attacked and his followers made much of his strong stand
on these questions. If the campaign was to be fought out on the
issue of the friendliness of the candidates towards the tariff and
internal improvements, then Clay was Ohio's logical candidate.
Had there been any doubts as to his attitude on these ques-
tions previously, there were certainly no grounds for any after
192 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
the session of Congress of 1823-4 ended. The General Survey
Bill, in which the advocates of internal improvements felt such an
interest, received his hearty support, while the tariff of 1824 was
strongly advocated by him. His speeches1 were reprinted with
favorable comment in newspapers all over Ohio. Even the Cin-
cinnati Advertiser, strongly for Jackson, praised Clay's defense
of the tariff2 and refused to attack him during the whole cam-
paign though it urged his withdrawal in Jackson's favor. The
Scioto Gazette probably expressed the general opinion of Ohio
on the tariff of 1824 when it declared it not quite equal to the
wishes of the friends of domestic industry but a favorable be-
Clay thus came through the session of Congress in a position
to make a strong bid for a united western support. His vigorous
fight for both the protective system and internal improvements
strengthened him generally throughout the West and probably had
much to do with his success in Ohio. But the very fact that he
was such a strong supporter of western interests gave his can-
didacy such a sectional character that he proved very unacceptable
to the other parts of the country. His lack of support outside his
own section was a disappointment to him.4 But his attitude dur-
ing the whole campaign was probably expressed in his letter to
Brooke in February, 1823, when he said, "Connect yourself with
the West, and are you not, whether the election is won or lost, on
the vantage ground?"5
Clay had other things in his favor. He had been a firm and
consistent member of his party. His advocacy of South Ameri-
can independence had endeared him to the West as the fearless
champion of human rights. His followers declared he had been
the particular guardian of western interests at the negotiation of
the treaty of Ghent.6 In short, Clay's previous career had in it
much for western Americans to admire and little for them to
1Columbus Gazette, April 8, May 6.
2Cincinnati Advertiser, March 3.
3Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, July 1.
4Clay to Brooke, Aug. 28, 1823; Works of Clay, IV, 78-83.
5Works of Clay, IV, 74.
6Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Feb. 26, 1824.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 193
criticise. But his attitude on the Missouri question was a weak-
ness in Ohio. Very early in the campaign he was charged with
opposing the restriction of slavery in Missouri and bringing about
the second Missouri compromise in order to add another slave
state to the Union.7 His opposition to the views of the Ohio
congressional delegation on that question was pointed out and
urged as a reason why Ohio should not support him.8 Because
Adams was a northerner and would profit most from the slavery
issue the Adams men relied largely on Ohio's dislike of slavery
to injure Clay's chances. This was their best weapon and they
made the most of it. It was kept before the people, even in the
last stages of the campaign, in the effort to injure Clay, but was
generally displaced in public interest by other questions. A lead-
ing Adams paper, urging Ohio not to support the advocate of
slavery, exclaimed despairingly: "The ignis fatuus 'western in-
terest', is like to absorb every sound moral and political considera-
It is probable that the slavery issue did keep many sincere
friends of internal improvements, especially those of New Eng-
land birth, from supporting Clay. But there were many others,
like Charles Hammond and James Wilson, the Steubenville
editor, who were willing, though opponents of slavery, to see it
slip into the background and more pressing problems take its
place. Clay's friends were not without a defense against charges
of friendliness to slavery. It was stated that he had worked to
secure emancipation in the Kentucky convention of 1798; that he
was a supporter of the American Colonization Society; that he
never appeared at the bar against slaves suing for their freedom
but had acted on behalf of many; that his attitude on the Missouri
question was due to his constitutional views and that he had
privately urged a member of the Missouri convention to work
for gradual emancipation.10 At any rate it was quite evident that
he was not an ardent pro-slavery advocate or even from the
7Ohio Monitor, Feb. 22, 1823.
8Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette, Mar. 22, 1823.
9Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, Sept. 16.
10 Article by "Seventy-Six," Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette,
May 7, 1824.
Vol. XXVI- 13.
194 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
South. He was a western man and this overshadowed his sup-
posed southern sympathies.
But there was an incident in Clay's career which threatened
to injure his chances in Ohio as much as his slavery attitude.
This was his connection with the United States Bank. The bank
had been very unpopular in the state for its actions during and
following the panic of 1819. The attempt to tax the bank, one
result of this dislike of that institution, had brought on a bitter
contest in which the state had not succeeded. Clay was one of
the principal attorneys for the great corporation and thus caused
himself much criticism. The contest was ended by 1824, how-
ever, and though the bank was by no means popular in the state,
the question was regarded generally as a dead issue, - so dead,
in fact, that the chief counsellor for the state in the bank con-
troversy, Charles Hammond, became Clay's campaign manager
while other opponents of the bank were his supporters. But
there was a smouldering resentment which occasionally showed
itself during the campaign in certain newspapers unfriendly to
The connection of Clay with the bank did not injure him
greatly except in the southwestern section of the state where
local interests were involved. The activities of the branch at
Cincinnati in 1821 and 1822, when the business depression was
at its worst, had aroused much bitterness. The branch had
suddenly called in its loans and then discontinued business
causing much distress. Debtors were shown no leniency and
as a result the bank acquired a considerable amount of valuable
real estate.12 Clay, as legal advisor for the institution, was
held partly to blame for this. While this was not put forward
as strongly as some other charges, it appeared often enough to
show that there was sufficient deep-seated resentment against
Clay in Cincinnati to prevent his cause from making much
headway. An article signed "Cassius",appearing in the National
Republican, charged that Clay, though opposed to the first
United States Bank, had favored chartering the second and had
11 Ohio Monitor, Mar. 1, 1823; Hamilton Intelligencer, Feb. 24, 1823;
Steubenville Gazette, Mar. 22, 1823.
12Burnet, Notes on the Northwest Territory, 408.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 195
allied himself with it in order to have its wealth and power back
of him in his efforts to reach the presidency, and that he was
using his power as counsellor for the bank to secure the support
of those indebted to it.13 Other articles intending to discredit
him through his connection with the bank appeared in the closing
weeks of the campaign.14 But the most significant of all is the
admission in the Clay organ of Cincinnati, the Liberty Hall and
Cincinnati Gazette, that much prejudice has heretofore existed
against Mr. Clay among the citizens of this place on the sup-
position that he advised the commencement of the suits against
the debtors of the branch bank." The editorial admitted that
it still prevailed to some extent but expressed the belief that it
was wearing away as it was without foundation.15 It evidently
persisted, however, for the vote in Cincinnati showed Clay least
popular of all the candidates. Charges and misstatements of
facts can be combatted openly but prejudices such as this one
persist in spite of all denials. The bank issue, fortunately for
Clay, was largely confined to Cincinnati and vicinity.
Though his opponents centered their attack on Clay as a
public man, his private life was not neglected. The Jackson
men, though indulging in personalities against their opponents,
did not attack Clay's private character because their own can-
didate was not invulnerable in this respect. But the Adams
partisans, proud of their candidate's character, hardly used the
proper restraint in attacking Clay. He was charged with being
a gambler and a duellist and utterly disqualified for the presi-
dency as to moral character.16 Crawford and Jackson were
not entirely neglected on this point either. "When men of im-
moral character and dissolute principles ascend to the helm of
government," said one writer, "she will soon become the scoff
and derision of the world."17 Charges against Clay's private
life, however, were of little importance compared to other ques-
13National Republican, Aug. 13, 1824.
14Ibid., Aug. 17, Oct. 15, Oct. 22, 1824.
15Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, May 14, 1824.
16 Numerous statements in the Ohio Monitor and the Delaware
17Letter to the National Crises, in Delaware Patron, Sept. 2, 1824.
196 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
tions raised against him. But it was neither his public career
nor his private life that furnished the most successful issue
against him but a certain political charge that appeared during
the campaign, was widely circulated, and immediately disap-
peared at its close. This was the supposed Clay-Crawford
The friendliness of Clay and Crawford was quite apparent
early in the campaign, and caused Adams and Calhoun to draw
more closely together. There was a feeling that the first two
would be eventually found on the same side.l8 The hopeless-
ness of Crawford's cause in the West led his supporters there
to join the Clay party. They were quite welcome, but it led the
way to the charge that this union was a part of a general plan
whereby the Clay and Crawford forces were to unite and, in
case of either's cause becoming hopeless, the other was to receive
the combined support of the two. Since Crawford had little
strength in the West and Clay in the East and South, it was
supposed that this alliance would work well. But as Crawford's
chances were much brighter throughout the nation as a whole,
this supposed agreement would give Clay's western support to
Crawford in the end. The opponents of Clay in Ohio seized
upon this charge as the best weapon to use against his popularity.
If Ohioans could be made to believe that support of Clay meant
eventually support of Crawford, "the intriguer and corrup-
tionist" and opponent of Western interests, then Clay's cause
would be irretrievably ruined.
As an actual fact this coalition never had any existence ex-
cept in the newspapers of the opponents of Clay. It had been
suggested by the Crawford men at different times during the
campaign as it would have been greatly to their advantage to
secure western support, if not in the electoral college, at least
in the House of Representatives where the election seemed cer-
tain to go. But Clay rejected all their overtures. He was
unwilling to see his own chances lessened, and besides saw the
impossibility of getting the West to support Crawford. He wrote
to Brooke that Crawford's friends were trying to exclude him
18 DeGrand to Dearborn. Jan., 1824, Mag. of Amer. Hist., VIII, 629.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 197
(Clay) from the House of Representatives in the hope that the
western support would go to their candidate. He declared this
plan utterly impossible because the northwestern states would
certainly go for Adams in case of his own exclusion from the
House election.19 Nevertheless the Crawford party held on to
some hope of a coalition, for Hammond, late in the campaign,
was urged from Washington to form a union of the Clay and
Crawford forces. Clay apparently to receive the vice-presidency.
He declined to act as agent in this affair, for which refusal he
was commended by Clay, who declared his purpose to refrain
from any arrangement or compromise.20 That is as far as the
idea of a coalition got. But some knowledge of these overtures
and the statements of certain Crawford papers outside of Ohio
and some Clay papers in the state furnished sufficient basis to
the opponents of Clay to raise a coalition charge and keep it from
It appeared quite early in the campaign21 and apparently
was causing some trouble for the Columbus Gazette found it
necessary in January, 1824, to make a formal denial that Clay
intended to go over to Crawford in expectation of becoming
Secretary of State.22 The appearance of the Clay electoral ticket
in March brought forth the charge in definite form. The Na-
tional Republican, most persistent in raising this issue, declared
that the electoral ticket looked like a Crawford ticket, that Clay
might withdraw, and that Ohio must be on guard lest the state
be sold to Crawford.23
This at once drew an answer from Charles Hammond, who
stated that the electoral ticket was a Clay ticket through and
through and that so far as their second choice was known a
large majority of the proposed electors preferred Adams. He
admitted a personal preference for Crawford.24 The Cincin-
nati Gazette at the same time issued a denial of Clay's reported
19Clay to Brooke, Feb. 23, 1824, Works of Clay, IV, 86.
20Smith, Charles Hammond, 36-37.
21For example, Delaware Patron, Aug. 6, 1823.
22Columbus Gazette, Jan. 22, 1824.
23 National Republican, March 30.
24Ibid., April 2.
198 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
withdrawal.25 The Scioto Gazette pointed out the absurdity of
the electors having a second choice since they were pledged to
Clay and could cast only one ballot.26 But the National Repub-
lican kept up the coalition charge, pointing to the union of Clay
and Crawford men against the electoral bill in New York,27 and
the statements of certain Clay papers in Ohio friendly to Craw-
ford.28 The Muskingum Messenger and the Mad River Courant
appeared unnecessarily friendly toward the "Treasury candi-
date." A letter from Chillicothe to the Richmond (Va.) En-
quirer, declaring that Crawford had many influential friends in
Ohio but could not get the state's vote until the election reached
the House, was produced as additional proof.29 The Adams
partisans circulated the coalition charge quite as industriously
as the Jackson leaders and warned the people that voting for
Clay meant voting for Crawford.30
Coupled with the coalition charge were frequent reports of
Clay's withdrawal. These two things were by no means con-
sistent with each other, for the coalition charge was based prin-
cipally on the belief that Clay would remain in the race to hold
the West for Crawford, if not in the electoral college, at least
in the House. His withdrawal before election could hardly mean
that a Crawford ticket would carry the state. But the Adams
and Jackson followers desired to see Clay withdrawn in their in-
terest if possible; if not, that he should be so discredited by the
coalition charge that he would lose Ohio. Hence, both reports
were put forth, regardless of their lack of consistency.
A Washington dispatch to the Columbus Gazette declared
authoritatively that Clay would remain in the fight to the end as
his withdrawal would only result in the division of his followers
and would produce no effect on the final result, whereas, "if, con-
trary to all probability, Mr. Clay should not be returned to the
25Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, April 2.
26Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, April 15.
27 National Republican, April 16.
28Ibid., April 16, June 1.
29Ibid., June 22.
30Circleville Olive Branch, in Delaware Patron, June 24; Delaware
Patron, July 15.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 199
House, his friends having done their duty, will be able, by con-
centration, to control the event."31 The Chillicothe Supporter
and Scioto Gazette declared that Clay's withdrawal would give
Ohio to Adams.32 As has been seen, at the Columbus Clay meet-
ing of July, signed pledges of the Clay electors to vote for Clay
alone were produced to put a stop to both coalition and with-
drawal reports.33 But it did not end here.
The National Republican charged that the patronage of the
Treasury Department was being bestowed on the friends of Clay
in Ohio and pointed to the appointments of two Clay editors to
positions as public land agents.34 It kept up the charges of a
Clay-Crawford alliance to the end of the campaign with increas-
ing bitterness. The Adams party likewise continued it.35
The Scioto Gazette denied the truth of it again and again,
and finally declared that, if Clay's friends preferred Crawford,
the friends of the other candidates had no right to complain as
their bitterness towards Clay had labored to produce this very
result. It charged Adams and Jackson with being in alliance in
Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi and the Carolinas. "And is it
not now in contemplation to make another transfer of all this
interest, so soon as the great question at issue shall come before
the House of Representatives? If so, is it becoming in the parti-
sans of Adams and Jackson to prate about "coalitions" . . .?36
In view of what actually happened in the House election, this
statement appears in a very curious light indeed.
The closing days of the campaign were marked by rumors
of Clay's withdrawal which gave his followers much concern.
Handbills and pamphlets were distributed, principally by Jack-
son partisans, declaring that Clay had withdrawn and that his
friends in Kentucky had gone over to Jackson.37 The Clay men
at Cincinnati prepared for such rumors by organizing a "Clay
31 Columbus Gazette, July 1.
32Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, July 8.
33 Columbus Gazette, July 22.
34 National Republican, Aug. 13.
Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, Sept. 16.
36 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Sept. 30.
37 Ibid., Oct. 14, Oct. 21.
200 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Committee of Vigilance" to counteract any false reports and keep
the Clay followers on guard. A double-column warning was pub-
lished in the Gazette urging the voters to pay no attention to these
The fact that Clay would receive little support in the East
and the growing doubt that he would have sufficient electoral
votes to reach the House were severe handicaps for his followers,
as he well knew39 That they succeeded in Ohio must be attri-
buted largely to the strength of the party of western interests
which was able to overcome the worst objections raised against
their candidate. The support of the Crawford men in Ohio
probably did Clay's cause as much harm as good, for their activi-
ties furnished the basis for the strongest objection which the op-
ponents of Clay could make use of. In this way alone could any
doubt be raised that a Clay victory in Ohio meant a sacrifice of
western interests. Clay was distinctively the candidate of the
tariff and internal improvement men of the West, while Craw-
ford was just as distinctively not. Had the coalition been effected
it would probably have cost Clay the vote of Ohio and perhaps
the whole West. As it was, the supposed existence of such an
alliance proved a serious factor, and only the direct open manner
in which Hammond, General Harrison and other Clay leaders
met the charge saved the day.
THE CAMPAIGN FOR JACKSON.
The nature of the Jackson campaign has already been given
some consideration. As has been stated, the campaign was based
largely on the personality and popularity of the "old hero". It
was the man of the people against the aristocratic party on the
one hand and the intriguers and corruptionists on the other. Such
a campaign seemed irrational and without basis to the Clay and
Adams leaders, who were inclined to regard the Jackson move-
38Liberty Halland Cincinnati Gazette, Oct. 1.
Clay to J. S. Johnston, Aug. 31, 1824, Works of Clay, IV, 98.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 201
ment as a temporary outburst which would soon pass away.
Each hoped to gain by it. Jackson was regarded as a good sol-
dier but out of question for the presidency.1
The attitude of Jackson toward western interests deserves
notice. His supporters all asserted his friendliness to the tariff
and internal improvements and declared that, being the stronger
candidate, he should have a united West back of him. People
generally seemed to have taken it for granted that, because he
was a westerner, he was naturally a tariff man and friendly to
internal improvements. At least there was not much inclination
to raise the charge of unfriendliness to western interests against
him. Jackson men could point to his vote in the Senate for the
tariff of 1824 and his letter to Dr. Coleman as evidences of his
favorable attitude towards the tariff. The Coleman letter aroused
enthusiasm among the Jackson followers2 and doubtless aided his
cause with the friends of the tariff, moderate though its expres-
The Cincinnati Gazette accused Jackson of voting without
principle on the tariff bill because he had voted to strike out
duties on cotton bagging to please the South, so it was charged,
and for the bill as a whole including the duty on iron to please
Pennsylvania.3 It had already expressed its suspicions of him
because his strongholds were in the South, which was opposed
to the tariff.4 The Gazette later argued that the next president
must be a friend of internal improvements and domestic manu-
factures, and that the domestic system had a thousand friends
more decided and efficient than General Jackson.5 But this was
not directly charging Jackson with hostility to western interests
and so did not carry far.
The partisans of Jackson were constantly urging Clay to
withdraw so that their candidate could have a united western
1For example, Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Feb. 21,
1824; Aug. 19, 1824.
2Hamilton Intelligencer, June 29; National Republican, Aug. 24.
3Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, May 28.
4Cincinnati Gazette, April 27.
5Cincinnati Gazette, in Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette,
202 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
support since both stood for the same interests. But the Na-
tional Republican seemed to believe that this could only be
accomplished by bitterly attacking the Clay men as intriguers
and corruptionists and referring to them as "the caucus junto"
in order to discredit the Clay movement. The Cincinnati Adver-
tiser took a most unusual attitude, quite the reverse of the
other Jackson paper. It supported Jackson but expressed great
admiration for Clay as a friend of western interests and desired
him to withdraw, even suggesting that he be made Secretary
of State if Jackson were elected.6 Its attitude was that the
West should unite on its strongest candidate as against the can-
didates unfriendly to the West. The editor, Moses Dawson,
proceeded on the theory that Jackson and Clay had everything
in common in opposition to Adams.7 But plausible as it sounds,
this was not actually the case. Clay was represented more
especially the economic demands of the West, Jackson, western
democracy; and these were by no means identical, as the next
few years were to show.
Hammond answered the Advertiser in a letter which shows
that he was under no delusions as to a Jackson-Clay alliance.
He expressed his belief that Clay's withdrawal would give Ohio,
as well as New York, New Jersey and Indiana, to Adams. De-
claring the opposition of the great body of Clay followers to
Jackson, he said, "It is their sincere and honest conviction that
he does not possess the political intelligence and judicial in-
formation indispensable in a president of the States." He
warned the Jackson men not to attribute the failure to elect a
western president to Clay: "Those who support him are not
liege subjects, whom he can transfer to General Jackson." He
declared that if Clay reached the House, there might be a west-
ern president. "I believe that no man pretends that General
Jackson can be chosen by the House."8
The Scioto Gazette in the last days of the campaign de-
clared that there was not "the most remote probability" of
Jackson's election by the House and expressed the belief that
6Cincinnati Advertiser, Feb. 7, Feb. 28, Mar. 3, 1824.
7 Cincinnati Advertiser, Sept. 11.
8 Ibid., Sept. 11, Letter signed "L."
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 203
his interests would be transferred to Adams.9 An Adams paper
had also expressed the same views.10 Both Clay and Adams
parties seemed to have regarded the possibility of Jackson's
election by the House as a political absurdity. Their leaders
distrusted him to such an extent that any other candidate would
have been preferred to him. John C. Wright, an Adams con-
gressman from Ohio, wrote to Ephraim Cutler, expressing his
alarm at having "a military chieftain, who has frequently been
known to be too violent to be restrained by law, to rule over
us."11 This was the typical attitude of many Adams and Clay
But Hammond went far beyond this. While he showed a
commendable moderation and restraint in his public writings,
his private views of Jackson exhibit a most astonishing bitter-
ness. "How is it", he wrote to Clay, "that no one speaks freely
of this man? Instead of being a frank, open, fearless, honest
man, is he not the victim of strong passions and prejudices,
violent when irresponsible, cautious when differently situated,
ambitious, vain and hasty, a fit instrument for others to work
upon, subject to be governed by flatterers, and still inclined to
hate every man of talents who has the firmness to look through
him and speak of him as he deserves? I think he is strongly
endowed with those traits of character, and that if classed as a
mere animal, he would be a kind of monkey tiger. I do not
know but that it would be well for such a monster to be placed
in the Presidential chair for the next term. King Snake suc-
ceeding King Log, and the citizen frogs made to scamper. I
am almost sure that if I had been this winter at Washington
I should have contrived to quarrel with him. I dislike him
for cause, I hate him peremptorily, and I could wish that his
supporters for the presidency, one and all were snugly by them-
selves in some island of Barrataria, and he be their king, pro-
vided, that they constituted the entire population. They would
make a glorious terrestrial pandemonium, and as fast as they
9Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Oct. 21.
10 Delaware Patron, Sept. 16.
11 Cutler, Life of Cutler, 185.
204 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
cut each other's throats the world would be rid of very trouble-
some politicians, and in general, right worthless citizens."12
The bitter sarcasm of the Clay leader shows that he would
hardly have supported Jackson under any circumstances, and
there are indications that this feeling was rather general among
the leading Clay men. Considering these things the eventual
union of the Clay and Adams parties was not such an unrea-
sonable and unexpected event as the Jackson presses later pro-
claimed it to be.
The attacks on the Jackson movement in Ohio did not show
much force until late in the campaign when Jackson's chances
appeared bright. They were confined principally to attempts to
show Jackson's personal unfitness for the presidency and do
not require much consideration here. His past life was ex-
plored, and it was charged that he was a duellist, had killed
Charles Dickinson and fought Benton; had imprisoned Judge
Hall without authority; had resigned as senator and as a judge
because he was not qualified; had opposed universal suffrage in
Tennessee and was an aristocrat; had engaged in controversies
with the governors of Georgia and Louisiana and with the Sec-
retary of War; had violated the laws of war and shown unusual
violence in the Seminole war; had indulged in the sports of
the turf and the cockpit; in short, possessed "an energy beyond
the law" and a number of personal failings very undesirable in
a chief executive.13 A number of pamphlets were circulated
against Jackson, the most important one being sent from Ten-
nessee to Ohio under the signature of a long-time enemy, Jesse
Benton, and enumerating in detail the violent acts of Jackson's
Little restraint toward their opponents was shown by the
followers of any of the candidates, especially at Cincinnati, but
-an abusive campaign of personalities almost from the beginning.
Yet when their opponents used the same tactics, Elijah Hay-
ward, editor of the National Republican, who was also chair-
Smith's Charles Hammond, 35.
13Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, Sept. 2, 14, 21, 24, Oct. 1;
Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Oct. 21.
14 National Republican, Oct. 19.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 205
man of the Ohio Jackson committee, complained of their
unfairness and attempted to show that Jackson had been badly
abused and maltreated.15 His lack of consistency was quickly
taken advantage of by the Clay partisans and he was silenced.16
Jackson's strength had greatly increased in Ohio during the
progress of the campaign until it became generally apparent that
he would run ahead of Adams and possibly defeat Clay. It
now becomes necessary to consider the course of the Adams
campaign and the decline of his chances.
THE CAMPAIGN FOR ADAMS.
John Quincy Adams was probably the most severely attacked
and certainly the least understood in the state of all three can-
didates. His cause was more vitally affected by the important
issues at stake than either of his competitors. This makes a
consideration of the Adams movement of unusual interest.
The partisans of Adams carried on the campaign with two
important arguments for their candidate, namely, the necessity
of electing a man from the free states and the high qualifications
of the New England candidate. The slavery issue has already
been discussed and needs little further consideration here. It
drew to Adams the New Englanders and many from the Middle
States who believed opposition to slavery the vital issue. One
element in the Adams following was the Society of Friends, then
the principal opponents of slavery, who were represented on the
electoral ticket.1 But, as has been seen, the Adams movement
by no means included the whole number of the opponents of
slavery but rather those who put opposition to slavery above all
other considerations. To the extent to which the Adams men
could make the slavery question the leading issue depended their
chances of success in Ohio. They realized that this was their
15National Republican, Oct. 1.
16 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Sept. 30, Oct. 7.
17 Ohio Monitor, in Delaware Patron, May 20.
206 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
strength and made the most of it.2 But circumstances were un-
favorable and other issues proved more important.
The Adams partisans were very proud of the talents, learn-
ing, experienced statesmanship, and high moral character of their
candidate. In the emphasis they placed on this last qualification
can be seen the New England influence in the Adams camp. The
high qualifications of Adams were recognized, even by his op-
ponents, who would have found it difficult to attack him on these
grounds, but such qualities, though everywhere admitted, were
not of the sort to arouse popular enthusiasm. And there were
certain points where prejudices could be developed against him.
The opponents of Adams attacked him very bitterly on per-
sonal grounds. He was called a Federalist and an aristocrat, a
friend of England, the son of his father, a disbeliever in Chris-
tianity, and even a slave-holder.3 Every prejudice was appealed
to in order to injure his chances, and every conceivable act of
his life that could be used was twisted into something to his dis-
credit. For example, the fact that he was a Unitarian furnished
grounds for some severe attacks on his religious views in a
variety of forms4 and led the Miami Republican, an Adams paper,
to urge that these persons who questioned his religious beliefs
should hold a convention, not to decide what these beliefs really
were but to determine what they should be called so that there
might not be so many inconsistencies.5
Federalism was another charge used quite extensively, for
Federalists had never been popular in the West. Adams was
attacked both for belonging to that party and for deserting it to
become a Republican.6 This was intended to injure him with
both parties. The acts of the administration of John Adams, the
Cunningham correspondence, the Pickering controversy, some
early writings and speeches, were all used to show the Federal-
2See Ohio Monitor, Delaware Patron, Chillicothe Times, leading
3See especially National Republican, Cincinnati Advertiser, and the
4For example, National Republican, Sept. 10, Nov. 26.
5Miami Republican, in Chillicothe Times, Aug. 11.
6For example, Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, April 29,
June 24, Sept. 9, Oct. 21.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 207
ism and the political inconsistencies of the New England candi-
date. The National Republican declared the contest was be-
tween the "second Washington", referring to Jackson, and the
The Adams men answered the charge of Federalism by
pointing out that Pickering, Otis, and other old Federalists were
supporting Crawford8 while in Ohio Charles Hammond, Judge
Burnett, Henry Bacon, Elisha Whittlesey, General Beecher and
other former Federalists were supporting Clay and that not a
leading Federalist was for Adams.9 So far as any conclusions
may be drawn from the returns Adams probably received the
bulk of the former Federalist vote in Ohio, though this was of
slight importance. The reason was that he was a New Englander
and received the votes of former New Englanders, which in-
cluded most of the Federalists. His supposed Federalism prob-
ably had little to do with the result.
Closely connected with this charge was the attempt to arouse
feeling against Adams by calling him an aristocrat and a mon-
archist. The acts of his father were recalled to show what might
be expected of the son. It was charged that he was the aristo-
cratic candidates and that he possessed monarchical principles,11
the "Royal Candidate" of the "hereditary house,"12 "that bigoted
aristocrat, whose principal merits consist in a talent for sly
cunning, which distinguishes the titled vassals of European gov-
ernments."13 Such a system of attack could not help but appeal
strongly to the prejudices of many western democrats, for in the
West a charge of aristocracy ranked not far below high treason
in seriousness. Adams did nothing to lessen these prejudices;
on the contrary, his very aloofness from politics and his refusal
to make a public play for support seemed to substantiate the
charges against him.
7National Republican, Sept. 3.
8Delaware Patron, Mar. 11, Oct. 7.
9Ibid., Oct. 7, Oct. 21.
10 Mad River Courant, in Columbus Gazette, May 29, 1823.
11Boston Statesman, in Hamilton Intelligencer, July 26, 1824.
12National Republican, Aug. 24; Scioto Gazette, Sept. 9, 1824.
13 National Republican, Oct. 29.
208 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Rufus King's opinion of Adams may well be given here. He
said of him: "The opinion of his integrity and of his superior-
ity as a learned statesman, is not disputed by anyone; but with
these qualifications, which are of great worth, a disinclination
toward him, grounded on the imputed infirmities which belonged
to his father, and added to the want of those properties which
produce and maintain personal attachments, prevails to an ex-
tent that it will be found difficult to overcome."14
The Adams movement lacked the popular appeal of the
Jackson party. Hence, to carry the West, it was all the more
necessary for the Adams men to make a strong appeal to the
vital western interests in order to win the friends of tariff and
internal improvements. Such an appeal, in connection with the
prevailing dislike of slavery, might have succeeded. But this is
where the Adams movement failed utterly. The most remark-
able feature of the whole Ohio campaign is found in this failure,
for it proved to be the one insurmountable weakness of the
Adams candidacy-his supposed unfriendliness to western in-
The Russell affair, previously mentioned, had had this ob-
ject in view but had failed. The question of the domestic
policy was then brought forward to embarrass Adams. It had
made Crawford an impossible candidate in the West and was
to prove a stumbling block for the northern candidate. Be-
cause he was a New Englander, Adams was regarded with some
suspicion in the West as New England had been considered
unfriendly to western interests. It was necessary for him to
prove that he was not narrowly sectional and that the West
would not be made to suffer for the benefit of commercial New
England. This he was unable or unwilling to prove. Some
explanation of his attitude is necessary.
The views of John Quincy Adams towards the protective
system and internal improvements were not those of the Vir-
ginia presidents. He was not troubled by constitutional scruples
and was favorable to a national system of roads and canals.
While not as strong a tariff man as Clay was, he was satisfied
14King to C. Gore, Feb. 9, 1823, Life and Correspondence of Rufus
King, VI, 499.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 209
with the tariff of 1824 and believed opposing interests could
be conciliated by mutual concession.15 There was nothing in
his attitude on these questions which could be regarded as
unfriendly to the West, but rather the reverse was true Rufus
King, who was well acquainted with the views of all the can-
didates, classified Adams with Clay and Calhoun as a friend
of roads and canals and protection to manufactures. This
seemed to be the general impression at Washington, yet quite
early in the campaign the question began to be raised in the
West whether Adams was not unfriendly to western interests.
A clear direct statement from him would have greatly aided his
cause but none came. Clay and Jackson by their votes and
speeches in Congress could show where they stood. Adams in
the office of Secretary of State had not this opportunity and
refused to make one.
It was his firm belief that the presidency should not be the
object of political intrigue but should come to the best man as
the unbiased choice of the people would show.17 So he utterly
refused to play politics and thus handicapped his own cause.
It was quite in line with this policy that he should refuse to
make public appeals to the voters or permit his views on im-
portant questions to be publicly known, as that would be play-
ing politics. Thus there came from him no open irrefutable
statement of his views on tariff and internal improvements,
despite the efforts of his friends to obtain one.
But there was another reason. The campaign was being
fought along sectional lines, and to secure the support of one
part of the country by a strong expression of opinion on an
important issue meant to lose the support of another section.
An unequivocal indorsement of protective tariff by Adams would
have caused him some embarrassment in New England and per-
naps aroused opposition where he was strongest. He had strong
hopes of securing southern votes, as there was a considerable
Adams following in several southern states. To declare strongly
15Adams, Memoirs, IV, 353.
16 Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, VI, 495, 499.
17 Quincy, Life of Adams, 130; Adams, Memoirs, VI, 132.
Vol. XXVI -14.
210 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
for tariff and internal improvements would destroy utterly his
chances in these states, as the example of Clay had shown. On
the other hand it might not win him the West, as he could
hardly hope to make himself as acceptable there as Clay. Thus
policy as well as principle dictated that he should avoid any
strong expressions of opinion.
Looking back over the situation in the light of what hap-
pened later it seems likely that Adams made a mistake. His
southern support did not materialize and his hopes in the West
were destroyed, so he gained nothing by his silence. On the other
hand, a stronger stand on the domestic issues would not likely
have hurt him much in New England as local pride and dis-
like of southern candidates were very strong. At the same time
he might possibly have carried some western states; but what
is of equal importance is that he would probably have run sec-
ond in the important Clay states and thus secured a stronger
claim to the vote of these states in the House. The circum-
stances under which they did go for him were such as gave
rise to the "bargain and corruption" charge and furnished the
basis for the rise of a strong Jacksonian party in these western
The Ohio Adams leaders were quite aware of the danger
confronting his candidacy in the state and did their best to
offset it by evidence showing that his views were entirely
friendly to western interests. Ephraim Cutler wrote to a friend
in the District of Columbia for some expression of the views
of Adams. The latter answered that he could state positively
that Adams had very recently expressed himself clearly in favor
of the constitutional power of the government to carry on works
of internal improvement and was quite favorable to the idea;
that he was generally in favor of protecting manufactures in
all cases where it could be done without too much affecting
other interests.18 But this was information at second hand.
On May 8 Postmaster-General McLean asked Adams for
leave to send a letter the latter had written him favorable to
internal improvements to his brother in Ohio, who was on the
18Cutler, Life of Cutler, 186.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 211
Adams electoral ticket and on whose behalf McLean had secured
this expression of Adam's opinion. The Secretary of State de-
clared he had no objection to this but wished him not to permit
the letter to get in the newspapers "as that would look too
much like advertising my opinions". McLean said he would
take care of that.l9 Thus the very purpose of the letter was
The Delaware Patron tried to explain the attitude of Adams
from the letter of a correspondent at Washington saying that
Adams could not openly avow his views because he was habit-
ually opposed to electioneering but that he was really the father
of internal improvements as he had offered the first resolution
in the Senate in 1807 calling for a report from the Secretary of
the Treasury on roads and canals. Gallatin's report was a re-
sult of this.20 This statement had been made before and an-
swered by the Scioto Gazette, which published an extract from
the Richmond (Va.) Enquirer to show that Worthington of
Ohio was the author of the resolution in the Senate which had
really called for Gallatin's report; that the report, when sub-
mitted, had been ordered printed in large numbers by a com-
mittee of which Adams was chairman simply to postpone action;
that Adams in 1807 had voted against a bill concerning removal
of obstructions to navigation on the Ohio; that he had voted
against the Cumberland road amendment in 1804.21 This evi-
dence was neither very recent nor very strong but it served its
purpose in raising doubts as to the real views of Adams.
The Gazette followed this up by pointing out that three-
fourths of the representatives from New England and New York
voted against the General Survey Bill, most important to the
cause of internal improvements, and that the most active friends
of Adams were in this number.22 It continued to emphasize the
necessity of the West supporting no man whose sentiments on
these questions could in any way be considered doubtful. "The
friends of Mr. Adams appear to be very sensible, that if the
19Adams, Memoirs, VI, 323.
20 Delaware Patron, Feb. 5, 1824.
21 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Jan. 10, 1824,
22Ibid., Feb. 26.
212 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Presidential election turns on this point- as most assuredly it
will - his prospects of support, in any one of the states west of
New York, are not very flattering.23
The passage of the tariff bill brought further trouble. The
vote of the Massachusetts delegation against it was taken as evi-
dence of Adams's opposition to it.24 The Richmond (Va.) Con-
stitutional Whig, a Virginia Adams paper, took this very attitude
and assured the people of Virginia that Adams was opposed to
the "ruinous policy" of the tariff and that the interests of
Massachusetts and Virginia in regard to the tariff, and roads and
canals, were one.25 At once the Clay and Jackson presses in
Ohio seized upon this as authoritative evidence that all they had
been saying about Adams was true.26 Furthermore, the New
York American, an anti-tariff newspaper of New York City, de-
clared for Adams.27 This seemed to be further proof. Thus the
activities of Adams partisans in other states were a continual
source of embarrassment to his followers in Ohio. This illus-
trates clearly the sectional aspect of the campaign, which made
it so difficult for any candidate to take a definite stand.
The friends of Adams published many extracts from his
speeches and writings to show his friendliness toward western
interests but usually these were rather general in their terms and
not of very recent date.28 Letters were printed from persons
who were acquainted with Adams, purporting to give his opin-
ions,29 but the indirect nature of this evidence only made it all
the more apparent that he was making no clear public statements
of his views.
23Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Mar. 25.
24Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, Apr. 27; National Republi-
can, June 18.
25Richmond Constitutional Whig, in Columbus Gazette, June 3.
26Cincinnati Advertiser, May 22; Scioto Gazette, June 24, July 1;
Nat. Rep., June 18.
27Cincinnati Gazette, in Scioto Gazette, June 24.
28For example, Miami Republican, in Delaware Patron, June 3;
National Crises, in Delaware Patron, July 23; Hamilton Intelligencer,
July 6, Letter by a Subscriber.
29Torch Light in Delaware Patron, Aug. 12; National Crisis, in
Chillicothe Times, June 23.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 213
Still the evidence was strong that Adams had been favorable
to internal improvements and even the tariff, and ordinarily
would have been considered sufficient. But in the heat of a
presidential campaign only the most direct, unequivocal, public
expression of sentiments could be accepted as proof, and this
was what was lacking. The burden of proof, unlike the case of
Jackson, rested with the Adams party and the doubts were not
cleared away. The Adams meeting at Columbus in July devoted
a large part of its address to an attempted refutation of the
charges of their candidate's unfriendliness to the domestic policy,
but the source of information, in which they had "implicit con-
fidence", remained unrevealed.30
The campaign went to its conclusion with doubts still being
expressed as to the real sentiments of the New England candi-
date and the burden proved a heavy one for his followers to
bear. The Scioto Gazette, in one of its last issues before the
election, reiterated the charges that it had been among the first
to make. "It has been proved beyond the possibility of a doubt",
declared its editor, "that he (Adams) always has been, and now
is, decidedly hostile to internal improvements and the protection
of national industry."31 The final appeal of that ardent Clay
supporter deserves to be given here. "The western states, op-
pressed almost beyond sufferance by the changes which have re-
cently taken place in the political world, and by a system of policy
which renders unavailing the fertility of their soil, and the in-
dustry of their citizens, must inevitably sink to the lowest depth
of human wretchedness, should the election terminate in the
choice of a president unacquainted with their wants, or indif-
ferent to their complaints."32
In that statement lies to a considerable degree the reason
why John Quincy Adams did not carry Ohio. He had not met
the vital issues in a way that would win for him the confidence
of the West. It is one of the paradoxes of political history that
the candidate least affected by sectional prejudices or constitu-
tional scruples toward these vital interests should be badly de-
30 Delaware Patron, July 22.
31 Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette, Oct. 21.
32Ibid., Oct. 21.
214 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
feated in the state where they were most popular largely because
he was believed to be unfriendly or indifferent toward them.
His failure to carry Ohio was very costly to him. The sixteen
electoral votes of the state added to his total would have given
him 100 electoral votes, one more than the total for Andrew
Jackson. Thus Adams, and not Jackson would have come be-
fore the House as the leading candidate, and Clay, in throwing
his influence to Adams, would have been ratifying the popular
will. The "bargain and corruption" cry, if raised at all, would
have lost much of its force and the future have been changed
for all concerned. This is, of course, mere speculation but it
shows the interesting possibilities that lay in Ohio's electoral vote
THE ELECTION BY THE PEOPLE.
Election day came with numerous pamphlets and final ap-
peals to the voters being circulated. Despite the heat of the
campaign and the bitterness of its last stages the vote cast was
disappointing. At the election for governor, held early in Octo-
ber, the total vote was 76,634,1 the largest vote ever cast in the
state, although the campaign of Allen Trimble against Governor
Morrow had received little attention in the newspapers, being
almost entirely obscured by the presidential contest. But the
total vote at the presidential election was only 50,024,2 two-
thirds that of the gubernatorial election.
The Clay men attributed this to the overconfidence of their
friends in the interior counties who did not attend the polls in
large numbers.3 The Cincinnati Advertiser blamed the defeat
of Jackson on the apathy of the people in the northern and north-
eastern counties.4 A better explanation is that it was generally
expected all over the country that no candidate would receive a
majority of the electoral vote and that the election would cer-
1Ohio Election Statistics, 1914; p. 3.
2Ibid., p. 3.
3Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, Nov. 16.
4Cincinnati Advertiser, Nov. 17.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 215
tainly go to the House of Representatives. Hence the choice of
the electors was not of so much importance.
Though the Ohio vote was not so large as was expected it
was far larger than that cast at any previous presidential con-
test, the largest vote prior to 1824 having been 10,721 in 1812.5
Ohioans had not been in the habit of voting at presidential elec-
tions as they had at elections for governors, when large votes
were usually polled; so that, after all, the vote in 1824 was a de-
cided advance. The absence of a real contest in earlier elections
explains the light votes prior to 1824. In 1828 the total was
130,993,6 an astonishing increase.
Early returns from the populous southwestern counties
seemed to indicate that Jackson was successful, but as the returns
from the interior and northern counties came in Clay's vote grew
until the final returns read: Clay, 19,255; Jackson, 18,489;
A brief consideration of the returns shows some interesting
results. Jackson carried the southwestern counties from Darke
on the Indiana border to Adams county on the Ohio River, ex-
cepting only Preble. This group included Darke, Montgomery,
Warren, Butler, Hamilton, Clermont, Brown, and Adams. Of
these, Hamilton and Butler were the largest counties in popula-
tion in the state. In each of these counties, except Montgomery
and Warren, Jackson had an actual majority over both his op-
Pike, which touches Adams county, and perhaps should be
included in this group, was carried by Jackson as was one in-
terior county, Perry. In the eastern part of the state, he was
successful in the adjoining counties of Columbiana, Jefferson,
and Harrison, and two near this group, Wayne and Coshocton.
The fact that Clay was able to carry Stark and Tuscarawas kept
Jackson from having a solid block of counties just south of the
To the surprise of his followers Adams did not carry all the
5 Ohio Election Statistics, 1914, p. 2.
6Ohio Election Statistics, 1914, p. 2.
7Ohio Election Statistics, 1914, p. 3; Columbus Gazette, Nov. 11,
216 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Western Reserve, losing the four middle counties, Lorain, Cuya-
hoga, Medina, and Portage, to Clay. In the geographical center
of the state the New England candidate carried the three ad-
joining counties of Union, Marion, and Delaware. In the south-
east on the Ohio River, the three Adams counties were Wash-
ington, Meigs, and Athens. Greene, adjoining the Jackson group
in the southwest, was the only other county in which Adams was
Clay had all the others, including most of the interior and
northwest, portions of the eastern and southern parts of the
state, and the four Reserve counties and Preble, mentioned be-
With two or three exceptions the counties carried by each
candidate were in groups. In the southwest Jackson's victory
was probably due to the prejudices against Clay there, as has
been explained, and the strong Jackson organization at Cincin-
nati, which sent out newspapers and pamphlets, and organized
committees all over the Miami country. In the eastern part of
the state the counties settled largely by Pennsylvanians went for
Jackson, as Pennsylvania was overwhelmingly for him and this
influence reached across the border. The number of Germans,
or Pennsylvania Dutch, was large in several of the eastern coun-
ties,8 and to these the Jackson committee had made a special, and
rather alarming, appeal.9
The portions of the state carried by Adams were in nearly
every case those settled originally by New Englanders and con-
taining an influential New England element, as in the Western
Reserve, the Delaware group, and the three southeastern coun-
ties, where the first permanent settlers in the state had located.
But the Adams men were disappointed at the result in the Re-
serve where Clay had run very well, probably because of the
great popularity of internal improvements there. The Erie canal,
nearly completed, would give the Lake counties a waterway to
New York City while the proposed Ohio canal system would
connect them with the interior of the state. Cleveland would
then become a city of real importance.
8Faust, German Element, I, 422.
9Letter of Atwater, Delaware Patron, Nov. 25.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 217
Clay's vote requires little explanation. It was natural for
Ohio to support the candidate who best represented her interests,
and his plurality would probably have been larger had his
chances in the whole country seemed brighter. As it was, with
a real doubt existing as to whether he would have sufficient votes
to reach the House of Representatives, he had carried the largest
state west of the Alleghanies despite the appeals of those oppos-
ing him for Ohio not to throw away her votes on a hopeless can-
didate. It shows the hold the domestic policy had upon the peo-
ple of the state. Most of the Scioto Valley, the interior coun-
ties, with few exceptions, and the thinly settled northwest gave
Clay large pluralities. These parts of the state felt especially
the necessity for roads and canals to give them outlets to the
markets and to make their lands profitable. Although Clay had
less than two-fifths of the total vote, he had carried more than
half the counties of the state. The distinctly rural counties, ex-
cept where peopled by New Englanders, had gone largely for
It is a significant fact that about four-fifths of the counties
were so decided in their preference that they gave the candidate
of their choice a majority over both his competitors, not a mere
plurality. In most localities there was a decided predominance
in favor of some one candidate. The strength of parties had
not become generally distributed throughout the state.
The result of the election caused satisfaction but not jubila-
tion among the Clay partisans for their plurality had been very
narrow. The Jackson presses immediately set up the cry of
coalition. It was charged that a portion of the Adams "Swiss
Corps", as the National Republican called them, had joined with
the friends of Clay to defeat Jackson when they saw that the
cause of Adams was hopeless.10 Clay's large vote in the Western
Reserve was pointed out as proof of this. Such an idea had
not even been hinted at by the Jackson papers before the elec-
tion, for the Clay and Adams parties had been showing any-
thing but a friendly spirit toward each other.
10Cincinnati National Republican, Nov. 19; Cincinnati Advertiser,
218 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
This charge was at once denied by the Cincinnati Gazette
and the absurdity of such a coalition in the lake counties and
nowhere else was pointed out.11 But the National Republican
reiterated its belief in it, though no proof was given, and blamed
the "Caucus Junto" for dividing the West and laying the founda-
tions of another Burr intrigue in the House of Representatives,
"without promoting the restless ambition of their chief."12 The
Advertiser hoped that the Clay electors would vote for Jackson
and thus undo the damage,13 but such an idea was never con-
With the meeting of the electoral colleges interest turned
to the approaching House election.
THE HOUSE ELECTION.
It was not definitely known until after the electoral colleges
had met that Clay would not be among the first three, so his
friends generally avoided expressing any opinion as to the House
Election. But Clay had virtually decided already to support
Adams. He had written to Hammond late in October that
Crawford's caucus nomination, the state of his health, and the
principles he feared his administration would adopt were strong
objections to his (Clay's) supporting him.1 The Clay-Crawford
coalition charge had disappeared with the election and a new
Adams-Clay coalition seemed to be forming.
That the Jackson party was well aware of this is shown by
the attitude of the Cincinnati National Republican. It began to
express great fears of intrigue as did the Advertiser as well.2
On December 28 the former made a bitter attack on the "Ohio
Caucus Junto." "We understand," it said, "that some of the
leaders of this aristocracy, since the fall of their idol, have
directed all their mighty forces to rendezvous at Washington
11Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette, Nov. 19.
12National Republican, Nov. 23.
13Cincinnati Advertiser, Nov. 17, Nov. 24.
1Smith's Charles Hammond, 37.
2 Cincinnati Advertiser, Dec. 4.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 219
City, where they are destined to follow in the train of John Q.
Adams, and serve as whippers-in to his party. It is really amus-
ing to observe with what facility some of the chief men of the
Clay party in Ohio, men who have pretended to be the cham-
pions of a liberal and enlightened policy for the protection of
Domestic Manufactures, can veer about, as interest or ambition
may dictate, and become the humble supporters of a man notori-
ously opposed to 'domestic measures.' Is the public sentiment
of Ohio to be not only disregarded, but outraged? The vote
of this state, in Congress, cannot be given to Mr. Adams with-
out a wanton and flagrant violation of trust."3
This was the warning of the Jackson party but it went
unheeded. The National Republican now began to assume that
Jackson's election was certain and spoke of the bright prospects
before the people in his approaching administration.4 It declared
the reported Adams-Clay coalition was to be expected from the
course some of Clay's partisans had been taking in Ohio but
that Clay would not succeed in dividing the West.5 This con-
fident tone was doubtless assumed for effect, for it had no basis
Meantime Clay had written his letter to Blair declaring his
intention of voting for Adams and expressing his fear that
pernicious results might come from the election of a military
candidate. "What has great weight with me is the decided
preference which a majority of the delegation from Ohio has
for him (Adams) over General Jackson."6
Although most of the Ohio representatives had probably
made up their minds already, as Clay's letter and the threaten-
ing attitude of the Jackson papers indicate, a meeting was held
to determine finally their action and to make public their inten-
tions.7 Soon afterwards it was publicly announced by the Ohio
and Kentucky delegations that they would support Adams.8
3National Republican, Dec. 28.
4Ibid., Jan. 14, 1825.
5Ibid., Jan. 18, Feb. 15, 1825.
6Clay to Blair, Jan. 8, 1825, Works of Clay, IV, 107.
8 Adams, Memoirs, VI, 478.
7Adams, Memoirs, VI, 473; Address of Clay to The Public, 1825;
Append., p. 31, Letters of McArthur and others.
220 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Amid great excitement the House election was held and
Ohio gave her vote to Adams. The delegation voted, ten for
Adams, two for Crawford, two for Jackson.9 Bartley, Beecher,
McArthur, McLean, Sloane, Vance, Vinton, Whittlesey, Wright
and Patterson voted for Adams; Wilson and Ross for Craw-
ford; and Gazlay and Campbell, from the southwestern part
of the state, for Jackson. The vote of the representatives was
thus decisively for Adams.
The news of the election was quietly received in Ohio. The
Adams party was well pleased with the result,10 the Clay men
apparently satisfied,11 and the Jackson partisans indignant. The
National Republican published the news under the heading, "The
long agony is over - the Bourbons are restored."12 In its suc-
ceeding issues it bitterly attacked the Ohio congressmen for
misrepresenting their constituents and the interests of the West.13
The Hamilton Intelligencer warned the people to remember those
representatives who had been faithful to their trust and those
who had trampled upon the wishes of the people.14
It now remains to consider whether the result was really
satisfactory to the state or whether it was a violation of the
expressed public will, as the Jackson partisans declared. They
made much of the fact that Jackson, according to the popular
vote, was the second choice of the state, and should have re-
ceived its vote, with Clay excluded from the House. But this
is a doubtful claim, for there is no way of finding out with
entire certainty which candidate was the second choice of the
19,000 voters who had supported Clay as their first choice. If
their leaders rightly represented their wishes, and there is nothing
to indicate otherwise, then Adams was their choice and the Ohio
delegation in Congress was correctly interpreting public senti-
ment, for the combined Adams-Clay vote in the state was a
large majority of the whole. The best evidence that Ohio was
satisfied is found in the congressional election of 1826, when
twelve of the fourteen representatives elected were administra-
9National Intelligencer, Feb. 11.
10Delaware Patron, Feb. 24.
11 Columbus Gazette, Feb. 24; Scioto Gazette, Feb. 20.
12National Republican, Feb. 13.
13Ibid., Feb. 22, Feb. 25, March 8.
14Hamilton Intelligencer, Feb. 28.
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 221
tion supporters.15 Of the ten who voted for Adams in the
House election, eight were candidates at this election and all
were re-elected. This does not indicate any repudiation by the
The charge that the members of the Ohio delegation voting
for Adams were tools of Clay and were sacrificing western in-
terests to his ambition is without basis. Their preference for
Adams is not at all surprising when the general distrust of
Jackson felt by the Clay leaders in Ohio is considered. As has
been shown before, they had always regarded Jackson as an
impossible choice. Hammond, in a letter already referred to,16
written the preceding September, had stated the opposition of
the great body of Clay men to Jackson because of his lack of
fitness for the office and warned the Jackson men that the Clay
supporters were not liege subjects to be transferred at will to
Jackson or any one else, as Clay saw fit. The explanations of
some of the Ohio representatives who voted for Adams in the
House may be given here as serving to corroborate what has
already been sufficiently dealt with, the incongruity of a Jack-
son-Clay alliance, and to make clear the basis of the Adams-
Duncan McArthur, afterwards governor, declared that
Ohio's interests were being jeopardized by the course Jackson
and his friends were pursuing towards internal improvements
and the tariff. "On the other hand, it was evident, that, for the
support of those measures, our only reliance was upon the
friends of Mr. Adams, the identity of interest between Northern
and Western States, and the liberality of the Eastern members
of Congress."17 This statement contains the reason why the
Clay to the Public, Appendix, 30-61.
Adams-Clay alliance was a natural logical union. Members of
Congress were in a position to know the real views of the can-
didates towards the tariff and internal improvements, and, with
the heat of the campaign past, the Ohio members were far more
inclined to trust Adams than Jackson with his large southern
support. McArthur further declared that an even more serious
15 Niles' Register, 155-6.
16 Cincinnati Advertiser, Sept. 11, Letter signed "L."
17Letters of Ohio Representatives given in An Address of Henry
222 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
consideration was the qualifications of the candidates. "So far
as I was acquainted with the sentiments of Mr. Clay's friends,
I do not believe that they could have been prevailed upon to
have supported the election of General Jackson upon any con-
ditions whatever . . ." This statement is quite in line with
the views of Hammond expressed long before.
Mordecai Bartley, also a future governor of Ohio, stated
that it was well known that Clay's friends from Ohio would
not in any event have supported Jackson because Adams was
their second choice and was believed to be the second choice of
a majority of the people of the state. Bartley declared he would
not have voted for Jackson in any event as he was far inferior
to all other candidates in abilities and was no real friend to
tariff and internal improvements.
Samuel F. Vinton, another member of the delegation, said
that his constituents knew many months before the election that
Adams was his second choice. Elisha Whittlesey, who for many
years represented the Western Reserve in Congress, declared that
there was never any doubt about whom Clay and his friends
would support. Other members of the delegation expressed
Considering the general attitude of the Clay men during the
campaign and after, there is little inconsistency to be found.
They had never at any time given the Jackson party grounds
for believing that they would support Jackson. They had at-
tacked Adams because there was doubt about his friendliness
to tariff and internal improvements. They had not attacked
Jackson especially on these questions because they believed him
utterly unfitted for the presidency regardless of what his views
on these questions were. In the House election they had chosen
the former because they believed him better qualified and be-
cause they believed western interests would be made secure by
him rather than by Jackson with his large southern support.
It was an economic alliance of the North and West. There
was no sacrifice of western interests, as the Jackson partisans
charged, by the election of Adams. Rather the reverse was
true, if the policy of the new president toward internal improve-
ments be considered. The House election saw the union advo-
cated at the beginning of the campaign by the Adams and
Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824. 223
Clinton followers finally achieved, but in a way no one had
then foreseen and under conditions which made its permanence
very doubtful. The economic alliance of North and West, based
on their harmony of interests, proved too strong for the South
to break, but the political union, resting on this, succumbed
before the rising tide of Jacksonian democracy.
I. OHIO NEWSPAPERS.
Friend of Freedom, February 18 and 25, 1824. (Discontinued.
Only three numbers published.)
***Chillicothe Times. (Succeeded Friend of Freedom. First
number April 21, 1824.)
*Chillicothe Supporter and Scioto Gazette.
*Liberty Hall and Cincinnati Gazette.
**National Republican and Ohio Political Register.
***Ohio Monitor and Patron of Industry. (For 1823 only.)
**Hamilton Intelligencer and Advertiser.
*Western Herald and Steubenville Gazette. (Scattering num-
II. NEWSPAPERS OUTSIDE OHIO.
National Intelligencer. (Dec. 23, 1824-Nov., 1825.)
National Republican and Steubenville Gazette were originally for
Clinton. Friend of Freedom opposed Clay and was probably for Clinton.
Cincinnati Gazette was originally for Calhoun.
The common practice used by newspapers of copying important
articles from other papers makes the above list more extensive than it