Ohio History Journal

PARTY POLITICS IN        OHIO, 1840-1850*

BY EDGAR ALLAN HOLT, B. A., M. A., PH. D.

PREFACE

It has been my purpose in this study to trace the po-

litical history of Ohio during the 'forties in relation to

state and national problems. The period under investi-

gation affords an interesting cross section of American

political history, revealing appeals to party prejudice,

conflicting economic and social interests, political ma-

nipulations and "log-rollings," and the emergence of the

Northwest as a powerful section demanding in vigorous

terms a new consideration in the councils of the Na-

tional Government. The period also marks the growing

divergence of northern and southern interests which

ended in the Civil War, for the Northwest, like the

South, was developing a peculiar sectionalism which

threatened the integrity of the Union. Ohio's economic

interests and the personal ambitions of her political lead-

ers seemed to be menaced by southern combinations.

The press of both parties breathed open defiance to the

slaveholder, although the wealthier classes of southern

Ohio deprecated the agitation of a question which threat-

ened their commercial connections in the South. Prob-

ably of greater importance was the growing conflict be-

* Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio

State University.

(439)

440      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

tween the masses of the people and the privileged classes.

Although Ohio had lost many of the characteristics of

a frontier state, the followers of Jackson still dominated

this commonwealth at the opening of the decade. This

control was only temporarily challenged by the fantastic

Whig Log Cabin campaign of 1840 and the Democracy

reasserted its power within a year after that episode.

But the growing conservatism among the professional

classes and men of wealth during this decade prevented

the Democratic party from advocating extreme meas-

ures and transformed the Whig party into a still more

reactionary organization. Throughout the decade the

struggle of the radicals and conservatives furnished the

underlying motive on state issues. If the Liberty and

Free Soil parties aided the forces of liberalism, this was

not because a majority of those parties favored a greater

degree of democracy, but because these minor parties

tended to break up the conservative Whig party, and thus

enabled the radical elements to realize their program.

My materials have been drawn from the Ohio State

University Library, the Library of the Historical and

Philosophical Society of Ohio, the Library of the Archae-

ological and Historical Society of Ohio, the Library of

Congress, and the Library of the Pennsylvania Histori-

cal Society. The officials of these institutions have been

most helpful in placing their materials at my disposal.

I wish to acknowledge my obligations and express

my deep appreciation for those who have directed my

studies either in the way of helpful advice or formal in-

struction. I owe especial obligations to Professor Carl

Wittke, of the Ohio State University, who directed the

course of my researches, for his kindly advice on the

Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications  441

gathering of the materials for this study and for his

helpful and penetrating criticisms of the dissertation it-

self.

EDGAR ALLAN HOLT,

Ohio State University,

June, 1928.

CHAPTER I

THE ELECTION OF 1840 IN OHIO

Ohio, the first fruit of the Ordinance of 1787, en-

tered the Union in 1803. By that Ordinance, it was de-

termined that Ohio's economic growth should be based

on free rather than slave labour. This factor became

the basis of the later alignment of the State in opposi-

tion to the South. However, the proximity of Ohio to

slave-holding States forced it to adopt a conciliatory pol-

icy toward the slave system in order to retain close com-

mercial relations with the South. Throughout the early

history of the State, southern Ohio and particularly Cin-

cinnati, the commercial metropolis of the State, were

anxious to ally the economic and political interests of

Ohio with those of the South.

Richly endowed with a fertile soil and numerous

streams suitable for navigation, Ohio experienced a

rapid growth in wealth and in population. Although

this economic development was primarily agricultural,

thriving factories soon grew up at such points as Cin-

cinnati, Zanesville, Chillicothe, and Steubenville. After

the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, Cleveland

became the entrepot of raw farm products from north-

ern Ohio destined for New York and the distribution

point of eastern manufactured products bound for the

Northwest.

The expansion of the factory system in Ohio, which

resulted from the federal tariffs of 1816, 1824, and 1828,

led to a demand for an extended market. The commer-

(442)

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850  443

cial needs of southern Ohio were met by the southern

slave system which afforded a market for the food sup-

plies and manufactured products of the Ohio Valley.

This situation produced an economic alliance between

southern Ohio and the slave states which explains much

of the political differences between the former and

northern Ohio which was bound to New York by com-

mercial ties.

Up to 1850 the tremendous development of the

wealth of Ohio was due largely to the construction of

a network of one thousand miles of canals through

thirty-seven counties, connecting Lake Erie and the

Ohio River by two continuous routes, one with termi-

nals at Cleveland on the Lake and Portsmouth on the

Ohio and the other joining Toledo and Cincinnati. By

1850, Ohio ranked third among the states in the cash

value of her farms, Cincinnati was the chief packing

center in the West, the annual value of the products of

the gristmills and sawmills of Ohio was more than

$9,000,000, and the total capital investment of the State

in banking institutions and in the manufacturing of such

articles as hardware, iron, crockery; and in the packing

of meats, had grown from $4,000,000 in 1822 to $28,-

000,000. At the same time the population had increased

to 2,000,000, most of whom were located in counties

served by Lake Erie, the Ohio River, and the canals.

In 1850, Cincinnati had a population of 115,000 drawn

from all parts of the United States and Europe, and

Hamilton County held almost one-third of all the Euro-

pean immigrants who came to the State.

The source of Ohio's population determined the

political history of the State, producing sectional lines

444      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

almost as marked as those dividing the sections from

which each of the elements came. One of the largest

single elements entering into the racial composition of

the State's population was the Scotch-Irish frontiersmen

of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Kentucky. The Scotch-

Irish from Pennsylvania overflowed into central and

eastern Ohio in quest of fertile lands as soon as the

region was opened to settlement, while those from Ken-

tucky settled in the southern portion of the State. The

latter were composed largely of the poorer, more demo-

cratic and non-slave-holding classes of the South, many

of whom were opposed to slavery and all of whom were

anxious to better their economic situation. Chaddock

asserts that "The influence of this Scotch-Irish stock in

southern Ohio was very marked. They brought with

them their religion; they asserted their ideas of indi-

vidual freedom and economic independence, and they

supported the political principles of Jefferson and the

rising democracy."¹ Another element was the Germans,

who came in large numbers both from Pennsylvania as

a part of the frontier class, and, during the 'forties, di-

rectly from Germany. Although scattered over the

State in respectable numbers, a large proportion of the

Germans settled in Cincinnati. Most of them formed a

close political alliance with the Scotch-Irish followers of

Jefferson and Jackson, opposing corporate interests and

a high protective tariff during the later 'thirties.

Another, but smaller element, was the Quakers who

came to Ohio from Virginia and North Carolina as a

result of their lack of sympathy with the slave system.

1 Robert E. Chaddock, "Ohio Before 1850," in Columbia University

Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, v. XXXI, p. 33.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850      445

Probably the most distinctive contribution in this mix-

ture of Ohio's population was the settlement of New

Englanders on the Western Reserve. As a result, the

Reserve became the backbone of opposition to Jeffer-

sonian and Jacksonian Democracy until 1848 when the

voters of that section became convinced that the Whig

party was the tool of the "slave power."

From the earliest days of its organization as a State,

Ohio was dominated by the followers of Jefferson. This

unanimity of sentiment tended to disappear after 1812,

and crystallized into definite political parties after 1824,

when the economic needs of the West enabled Clay and

Adams to unite the East and West in behalf of a pro-

gram calling for a high protective tariff and internal im-

provements.2 This coalition threatened to dominate the

political situation, but the frontier character of Ohio

made its conquest by the Jacksonian Democracy a com-

paratively easy task. The masses of the people, filled

with the frontier dislike for banking institutions, rallied

behind Jackson in his war on the United States Bank.

But as Ohio increased in wealth, the conservative forces

gathered strength and began to oppose the levelling ten-

dencies of the Democracy with some degree of success.

Moreover, Jackson's popularity did not descend to Van

Buren, his designated successor, and the Panic of 1837

prepared the way for a general debacle in the ranks of

the Democracy.³ To the Whigs, it appeared that the

2 Eugene H. Roseboom, "Ohio in the Presidential Election of 1824,"

in Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications, v. XXVI, pp. 153-224.

3 For a resume of the political situation in Ohio before 1840, I have

relied upon Eugene H. Roseboom's "Ohio Politics in the 1850's," a doctoral

dissertation in the course of preparation at Harvard University. See also

Chaddock, op. cit., in Columbia University Studies in History, Economics

446       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

widespread distress which resulted from that panic was

caused by the Democratic program of a "war on the cur-

rency." The Whigs therefore hoped to appeal for sup-

port to an increasingly large number of laborers thrown

out of work by the effects of the financial depression

which continued throughout the remainder of Van

Buren's term.

The Van Buren administration had scarcely begun

in 1837 when the opposition party began to lay plans for

the next campaign.⁴ The problem for the Whigs was to

unite under one leader the discontented Democrats, the

land tenants of New York who were dissatisfied with

the old patroon system, the abolitionists, the friends of

Harrison, Clay and Webster; and those along the north-

ern border who felt that Van Buren was a tool of the

British because he had not avenged the burning of the

Caroline.⁵

This incident grew out of the efforts of Canadian

revolutionaries in 1837 to obtain American aid. The

Caroline, an American vessel, which had been engaged

in carrying supplies from Fort Schlosser, New York, to

the Canadian rebels on Navy Island, was boarded and

burned on the American side of the Niagara River by

Canadian military authorities.⁶ There was intense ex-

and Public Law, v. XXXI; Homer J. Webster, "History of the Demo-

cratic Party Organization in the Northwest," in Ohio Archaeological and

Historical Publications, v. XXIV, pp. 1-120; Homer C. Hockett, Western

Influences on Political Parties to 1825.

4 A convention of the Ohio Whigs as early as 1837 suggested a national

convention for the following year to select candidates for the campaign of

1840. Niles' Register, v. LII, p. 329.

5 McMaster, John Bach, A History of the People of the United States,

v. VI, p. 550.

6 Ibid., v. VI, pp. 440-441.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850   447

citement all along the northern border over this incident

and because of the arrival of Canadian political refugees

in the border towns, and the Whigs seized the oppor-

tunity to charge the Democrats with being pro-British.

A war with England was happily averted by Van Buren

who pursued the wise policy of enforcing strict neutral-

ity along the border. To these discontented elements

whom the Whigs sought to unite, must be added large

numbers of voters who blamed the Panic of 1837 upon

the Van Buren administration. Although the first po-

litical effects of the panic naturally were disastrous to

the party in power, a distinct reaction set in in favor of

the administration as the years passed. In New York

a Whig majority of 15,000 in 1837 fell to 10,000 in 1838

and to 5,000 in 1839.7 In Ohio, the political current was

running in the same direction and the Democrats won

the state elections of October 1838 and 1839 on a policy

of bank reform.8

Early in 1838, the Ohio Whigs began to put their

faith in William Henry Harrison as the one candidate

who could unite under his banner all the forces in oppo-

sition to the Van Buren administration. In January,

1839, the Belmont Chronicle put the slogan, "For Presi-

dent: William H. Harrison, Subject to a National Con-

vention," at the head of its editorial column.⁹ The

Whig State Convention of 1838 also endorsed Harrison,

subject to the action of a national convention, but prom-

ised that the Whigs of Ohio would be satisfied also with

7 Greeley, Horace, Recollections of a Busy Life, p. 129.

8 Ohio Statesman, October to November, 1838; Ibid., October to

November, 1839.

9 January 1, 1839.

448        Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

Clay or Webster.10 The Cincinnati Republican, a for-

mer Jackson paper edited by James Allen, came out so

uncompromisingly for Harrison that it was warned by

the Whig organ of the State to be more circumspect in

order not to antagonize the Clay Whigs of the State.11

The Whig program in Ohio was primarily one of

unification. Availability, not principle, was the essen-

tial quality sought in prospective candidates. James

Allen,12 in control of the Ohio State Journal since April,

1839, deplored the "unfortunate centrifugal tendency"

in the Whig party. "To be successful" in 1840, Allen

declared, "nothing must be hazarded that shall tend,

however remotely, to increase the dissonance and disaf-

fection that, just now, disturb our ranks.^"13 On April

19th, the Ohio State Journal announced that it would

support William Henry Harrison. The Whigs were

agreed that it would be wise to concentrate early on one

candidate, and thus prevent trouble between the follow-

ers of various rivals.

The friends of Webster were not without some hope

of securing support in Ohio for their favorite, but Wil-

liam Greene, a prominent Whig leader of Cincinnati,

assured them that western sentiment demanded a west-

ern candidate. In reply to queries as to what pledges

10 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), May 10, 1839.

11 Ibid., April 26, 1839.

12 Allen stated that when he was editor of the Cincinnati Republican

he endorsed Jackson's vetoes and abused Hammond of the Gazette "with

a political unction that must have been truly edifying to the enemies of

poor Nick Biddle." When Jackson removed the deposits from the United

States Bank in 1834, Allen resigned as editor of the Republican because he

disapproved of the removal. He then raised Harrison's name over the

editorial columns of the Cincinnati Courier, the first Harrison paper in

Ohio. Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), April 26, 1839.

13 Ohio State Journal, (Semi-weekly), April 12, 1839.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850      449

Harrison would make concerning Webster, Greene skil-

fully replied that "He does not choose to pledge himself

to any human being    . . . nor will he say what he

would probably do. But there are delicate modes of

intimation which have, if possible, more than the au-

thority of express terms--and my opinion is (and I be-

lieve no human has better means of forming a correct

one upon this particular) that if the General be elected

to the Presidency, he would not only prefer, but rely

upon it, that Mr. Webster should hold the first place in

his cabinet relations."14

Although the Whig State Central Committee, on

May 21, 1839, in an official call for delegates to a Na-

tional Convention in Harrisburg six months later, gave

its support to Harrison,¹⁵ the Clay forces of Ohio, led

by Charles Hammond, were not ready before October

to admit the defeat of their hero.16 The Cincinnati

Daily Gazette refused to join in the hue and cry for

Harrison, and during Clay's tour in the Northeast

printed daily accounts of his speeches and triumphal re-

ceptions.17 Clay's candidacy seemed to gather strength

until he reached Saratoga. Here he met Thurlow Weed,

who informed him that he could not carry New York

and that for the good of the party he should withdraw

from the contest.18 It was impossible to stem the Har-

14 Greene to Lovering, May 28, 1839, Greene MSS.

15 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), May 21, 1839. The members of

the State Central Committee were Alfred Kelley, chairman; Joseph Ridg-

way, Warren Jenkins, Lewis Heyl, and Samuel Douglass.

16 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October 4, 1839.

17 Ibid., August 16, September 3, 1839.

18 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, p. 555.

Vol. XXXVII--29.

450       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

rison current.19 Clay was not deserted on account of a

lack of faith in his program but on grounds of political

expediency. Union was necessary and it seemed un-

likely that Clay could unite all the fragments of the

opposition. The Cincinnati Daily Gazette, moreover,

frankly acknowledged that "Clay is not popular with the

people, a fact demonstrated twice, in direct appeals to

their suffrage. Then, as now, his friends stood stiff in

pertinacity--ought they now after two signal defeats,

to press their favorite again, without some tangible, in-

disputable change of position, favorable to his success."

As a fatal objection to Clay, especially for the Jackson

men whom it was necessary to conciliate, was the per-

sistent charge of "the corrupt bargain" of 1824, when

Clay had turned his strength to Adams and helped to

defeat Jackson for the presidency.20 Harrison leaders

paid fulsome compliments to Clay in order to take away

the sting of defeat and obtain the support of his follow-

ers.²¹ The middle ground taken by the Ohio State Jour-

nal in the interest of a perfect reconciliation of all fac-

tions was somewhat distasteful to the Clay papers in

northern Ohio and to the rabid Harrison papers in the

southern portion of the State;22 but as the summer wore

on, the former fell into line for Harrison.23

There was some sentiment in the State for Winfield

19 The Carroll Free Press in May declared that Harrison was more

popular with the "bone and sinew" than any other man whom the Whigs

could name. Carroll Free Press quoted in Ohio State Journal (Semi-

weekly), May 14, 1839.

20 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October 4, 1839.

21 Chillicothe Gazette quoted in Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly),

May 14, 1839; Circleville Herald quoted in Ohio State Journal (Semi-

weekly), May 10, 1839.

22 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), May 31, 1839.

23 Ibid., June 4, 1839.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850          451

Scott, but the Ohio State Journal shared the view of the

Baltimore Chronicle that it was too late to introduce new

and untried champions into the field.24  Oran Follett,25

a Clay Whig, considered Scott a good candidate to at-

tract former Jackson Democrats, after he saw that there

was no enthusiasm     among the Whigs of Ohio for his

favorite. In September, as a delegate to a district con-

vention to name representatives to the Harrisburg Con-

vention, Follett had announced his preference for Clay

as the most politically available candidate.26 Hardly

two weeks later, Follett was urging George H. Flood of

Virginia, a Democrat, and James T. Morehead, a for-

mer Whig governor of Kentucky, to support General

Scott, apparently on the ground that Clay could not win

for the party in 1840, because the anti-Administration

Democrats would not rally to his support.27 The Scott

candidacy was never very significant in this State, and

by November only two papers in Ohio, the Conneaut

Gazette and the Sandusky Whig (edited by Follett)

were openly in favor of Scott's nomination.²⁸ The se-

lection of delegates to the Harrisburg Convention re-

vealed an overwhelming sentiment for Harrison in Ohio.

By November, 1839, of the one hundred Whig papers

24 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), April 12, 1839.

25 Follett was a staunch Whig leader in Ohio throughout the decade.

Originally from New York, he became, upon removal to Ohio, editor, first

of the Sandusky Whig and then of the Ohio State Journal, and later a

leader of the Corwin movement for the presidency.

26 Follett and Camp to the chairman of the District Whig Convention,

September 30, 1839, quoted in "Selections from the Follett Papers, IV" in

Quarterly Publications of the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio,

1916, v. XI, No. 1, pp. 15-16.

27 Follett to Morehead, October 18, 1839, quoted in "Selections from

the Follett Papers, IV," loc. cit., v. XI, No. 1, pp. 18-20.

28 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), November 13, 1839.

452       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

in the State, five supported Clay, two clung to Scott,

and the rest favored "Harrison and Reform."²⁹

The defeat of the Whigs on the banking and currency

issue in the fall elections of 1839 created havoc in the

party in Ohio, and led Follett to comment bitterly on the

"state of the public morals, the heresies in government,

and the ignorant prejudices of the multitude in relation

to the Treasury . . ."30   The chief issue between the two

parties in 1839 had been one of the extent to which the

government should go in regulating the banks of the

State, which had undergone a succession of failures

since 1837. The Democrats favored a vigorous program

of reform but the Whigs were inclined to defend the

banks, asserting that their opponents really intended to

destroy the currency.³¹ The defeat of the Whigs was

attributed to various forces. The St. Clairsville Chron-

icle blamed the supineness of the Whigs,³² and the Cin-

cinnati Gazette refused to close its eyes to the fact that

the party was prostrate, and suggested that the Harris-

burg Convention fold up the Whig banners forever.³³

In spite of such pessimistic conclusions, delegates

were appointed to the Whig National Convention at

Harrisburg. Foremost among the representatives from

Ohio were Jacob Burnet, of Cincinnati; Reasin Beall,

of Wooster; the sturdy John Johnson, of Piqua, who

29 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), November 20, 1839.

30 Follett to Morehead, October 18, 1839, quoted in "Selections from

the Follett Papers, IV," loc. cit., 1916, v. XI., No. 1, p. 19. The Ohio State

Journal exclaimed in despair that "It seems like madness to contend against

an overwhelming fate--against a force that is sure to crush us." Ohio

State Journal (Weekly), October 16, 1839.

31 See Chapter II.

32 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), October 16, 1839.

33 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, November 7, 9, 1839.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850   453

rode to Harrisburg on horseback; and N. G. Pendleton,

of Cincinnati, who served on the committee to select

the officials of the Convention. When the Convention

assembled, Clay had the greatest number of pledged

delegates, but there were indications that the political

managers were not willing to have him lead the party

again in 1840. On the second day of the balloting,

New York, Michigan, and Vermont transferred their

support from Scott to Harrison and thus brought about

his nomination, much to the satisfaction of the Ohio

delegates, who had voted steadily for their favorite son.

The Convention then nominated John Tyler of Virginia

for vice-president.³⁴ The Convention recommended a

rally of the Whig young men of the nation at Balti-

more and then adjourned, without drawing up an

address to the people or framing a platform.³⁵ This

proved to be good political strategy, because any pro-

gram would have divided the Whigs and made defeat

certain. Party leaders in each section of the country

thus were left free to stress those political considera-

tions which most appealed to the voters of their partic-

ular section. To the Whigs of Ohio, the election of

1840 was a referendum on "Executive usurpation."

They condemned the frequency with which Jackson and

Van Buren had resorted to the veto as a usurpation of

power which belonged only to Congress.

The nomination of Harrison and Tyler was received

with great enthusiasm in Ohio. "Now is the winter of

34 Niles' Register, v. LXI, p. 232; Tyler, Lyon G., The Letters and

Times of the Tylers, v. I, p. 595.

35 Proceedings in Weekly Ohio State Journal, December 14, 1839; Mc-

Master, op. cit., v. VI, pp. 556-559.

454      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

our discontent made glorious summer by the nomina-

tion of this son of a Revolutionary sire," the Belmont

Chronicle declared. "Now do we breathe freer and

deeper than we have for the last three years."36 The

Cincinnati Daily Gazette saw in Harrison's nomination

certain defeat for the "fell disorganizing spirit" of

"locofocoism" and the "certain restoration of sound

republican doctrines; the security of our institutions."³⁷

Spontaneous and enthusiastic gatherings were held all

over the State to respond to the nomination. At a

convention in Cincinnati on December 16, speakers

who had supported Clay pledged their support of the

nominees.³⁸ The earlier despondency of the Whigs now

turned into confidence and all elements of the opposition

found it easy to support a candidate whose principles

no one knew. Reform of the "aristocratic" government

of Van Buren became the catch-phrase of the hour, and

in this program State Rights men, led by John G.

Miller in the Ohio Confederate and Old School Repub-

lican, as well as Jacksonians, discontented for various

reasons with the Van Buren administration, and Nation

alist Whigs could join heartily in the great attempt to

oust the Democrats. The Ohio Statesman, chief Demo-

cratic organ of the State, pointed out quite correctly,

that "The Federal party has no policy of its own--no

principles--no cohesion--no unity of sentiment upon

which to found a campaign, or concentrate their forces

for action,"39 and attributed the nomination of Harrison

36 December 17, 1839.

37 December 14, 1839.

38 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, December 16, 1839.

39 December 10, 1839.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850    455

to a combination of abolitionism, "Bankery" and anti-

masonry.40

The Democrats, of course, could do nothing but re-

nominate Van Buren. Their nominee had reached the

White House because of the spell of Jackson's popu-

larity, but he gradually had acquired an effective fol-

lowing of his own, while his policies were gradually

accepted by the masses of Democratic voters in the

North. In Ohio, resolutions of county and district con-

ventions forecast the renomination of the Democratic

president.⁴¹ The radical anti-bank faction of the party

was in control of the party machinery in the State and

was completely satisfied by Van Buren's policy toward

the banks.  The recommendation of an Independent

Treasury, in the president's third annual message, had

given Ohio Democrats their issue. Van Buren had

attacked the suspension of specie payments, and had

charged that it was not due to a lack of confidence in

the banks, but that it had been brought about merely

for the convenience of the banks. The President pointed

to the widely expanded system of bank credit as evidence

of the unsoundness of those institutions, and expressed

the fear that capitalists were using the banking system,

then in vogue, to exert powerful and insidious influence

over the entire country. As a remedy for these evils,

Van Buren, as is well known, urged the creation of

public depositories for the revenues of the nation in

order to "divorce" the funds of the government from

the intrigues of bankers and politicians.⁴²

40 December 11, 1839.

41 Ohio Statesman, August, December, 1839; January, May, 1840.

42 Richardson, James D., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers

of the Presidents, 1789-1897, v. III, pp. 540-547.

456      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

The Whig press of Ohio greeted Van Buren's mes-

sage as another Locofoco attack on credit and com-

merce. The Cincinnati Daily Gazette (W) believed that

the President intended to turn over his party to the

radicals after he saw the burst of enthusiasm for Har-

rison. "Perish credit, perish commerce! Down with the

checks and balances, the restraints imposed and the

rights secured by the Constitution," commented the

Gazette.  "The tyrant locofocos with the Executive

their instrument, are to administer the government

under the guidance of party impulse and party intri-

gue."⁴³ Wilson Shannon (D), elected governor of Ohio

in 1838 on a policy of bank reform, had, however, re-

ceded somewhat from his former position; and his mes-

sage to the General Assembly, in December, 1839, dif-

fered considerably from the views set forth in the Presi-

dent's message. The Ohio governor recommended a

system of independent banks under state regulation.⁴⁴

The Whig press commended Shannon's message, the

Cincinnati Daily Gazette declaring that there was not

one "Jacobinical feature in the whole document."⁴⁵ As

a result of Shannon's new position some Whigs actually

planned, for a time, to support him for re-election in

1840. But these plans were abandoned when the Dem-

ocratic State Convention of January 8, 1840, named

Shannon as candidate for governor on a platform of

bank reform.⁴⁶

The same Convention endorsed Van Buren for the

43 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, January 6, 1840.

44 See chapter on "Banking and Currency in Ohio Politics, 1840-1850."

45 December 6, 1839.

46 Ohio Statesman, January 8, 9, 10, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850    457

presidency, praising his proposal for an Independent

Treasury. It also declared its opposition to a high pro-

tective tariff and a system of internal improvements.

Van Buren was represented as a follower of Jefferson

and an advocate of a simple and economical govern-

ment.⁴⁷ There were no more ardent supporters in the

country, of Van Buren's proposal to separate the public

money from banking corporations, than Moses Dawson

of the Cincinnati Advertiser; Samuel Medary of the

Ohio Statesman; John Brough, auditor of state; or

Benjamin Tappan and William Allen, the two senators

from Ohio. Nearly every Democratic local convention

in Ohio adopted resolutions commending Van Buren's

policies and approving the candidacy of the "Little

Magician."⁴⁸ Ohio senators and representatives were

instructed by the Democratic General Assembly to sup-

port the Independent Treasury Law.⁴⁹ Its passage was

hailed by the Democrats as a second declaration of

independence50 and the Ohio Statesman praised it as the

only constitutional plan ever devised to care for the

public money. The clause providing for the payment

of government dues in specie found especial favor with

Medary, the editor of the Statesman, because it would

take from the monopolies of the country much of their

"ill-gotten power of oppression."51

The Democratic National Convention of 1840 organ-

ized with Governor William Carroll, of Tennessee, as

47 Proceedings of the Democratic State Convention in Ohio Statesman,

January 8, 9, 10, 1840.

48 Ohio Statesman, January 8, May 5, 1840.

49 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, January 16, 1840.

50 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, p. 547.

51 Ohio Statesman, June 24, July 7, 1840.

458      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

chairman. Among the prominent Ohio delegates were

Samuel Medary, John B. Weller (afterwards candidate

for governor and at this time a representative in Con-

gress), James J. Faran, of Cincinnati, S. A. Barker,

Peter Kauffman, a prominent German from Akron, and

C. J. McNulty. In contrast to the action of the Whig

Convention, the Democrats drew up a platform, which,

among other things, approved a strict construction of

the Constitution, to the extent of condemning a "general

system of internal improvements," or the assumption by

the General Government of state debts "contracted for

local internal improvements or other State purposes

. . ." Other features included a declaration against the

fostering of one branch of industry at the expense of

another, a statement denying the power of the Federal

Government to establish a national bank, and a condem-

nation of the efforts of abolitionists "to induce Congress

to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient

steps in relation thereto" as "calculated to lead [to] the

most alarming and dangerous consequences . . ."

During the latter part of the 'thirties, an increasing

number of abolition petitions asking the Federal Gov-

ernment to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia

led to the adoption of a rule in the House by which such

petitions were laid on the table without being read or

printed.⁵²

A resolution professing sympathy for the immi-

grants was adopted in order to catch the foreign vote.

Van Buren was nominated for president, but no one

52 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, pp. 295-296. The Ohio Democracy de-

nounced abolition petitions as attempts to disrupt the Union.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850     459

was named for the vice-presidency, since the local con-

ventions had not indicated an outstanding favorite.⁵³

The Democratic national organ described the contest of

1840 as one "between privileged orders and the great

mass of the people." "It is, in fact," the Globe contin-

ued, "only a new, more invidious, and dangerous modi-

fication of the old feudal system of the middle ages.

At that period, the great instrument of oppression was

the sword; now it is the purse. By the former, the

feudal baron carved out his fortunes; by the latter, the

rag baron acquires power and influence through means

of exclusive privileges, from which the great mass of

the people are forever barred."54 This idea of a class

conflict was mirrored in the Democratic press of Ohio,

which also represented the issue, as one between the

rights of the masses, and the privileges of the few, as

a second contest for first principles in government, and

as an avowal that the people's money would never again

be placed at the disposal of a few swindling bankers.⁵⁵

The Harrisburg nominations, in December, 1839,

were followed by enthusiastic preparations by the Whigs

throughout the State. Victory seemed imminent since

the campaign for unity had succeeded in drawing many

of the Jacksonians, who were dissatisfied with Van

Buren as a party leader, into the ranks of the Whigs.⁵⁶

On February 21 and 22, 1840, one of the most

important and enthusiastic Whig gatherings ever held

53 Proceedings of the Convention are taken from the Washington Daily

Globe, May 7, 1840.

54 Washington Daily Globe, May 12, 1840.

55 Ohio Statesman, March 2, 1840.

56 Ohio Whig Standard and Cincinnati Daily Gazette quoted in Ohio

State Journal (Semi-weekly), January 8, 11, 1840.

460     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

in the State assembled at Columbus. The proposal for

such a mass convention had been opposed by the staid

Cincinnati Gazette, a reform paper which opposed horse-

racing and coffee-houses, on the grounds that a conven-

tion was not conducive to cool deliberation.⁵⁷ But the

enthusiasm of the hour was irresistible, and the Gazette

soon joined the chorus in praise of Harrison. The Ohio

State Journal claimed that "Men who claimed member-

ship with all the political parties into which the country

was divided, are around us, resolved to merge their

differences of opinion on minor topics, in the one all-

absorbing, paramount question of Reform; determined

that the reins of government shall no longer remain

within the grasp of those who are driving to destruction

every interest and doctrine upon which the Confederacy

was based and upheld."58 During these convention days,

glorious for Ohio Whiggery, a continuous stream of

cheering thousands poured into Columbus undeterred

by muddy roads and intermittent rain. "Banners, in-

genious in device, and splendid in execution," an eye-

witness wrote, "loomed in the air; flags were streaming,

and all the insignia of Freedom swept along in glory

and in triumph--canoes planted on wheels and manned

by the brave and generous friends of Harrison and

Tyler--square-rigged brigs--log cabins--even a minia-

ture of old Fort Meigs--all these and more, made up

the grand sum of excitement and surprise." The same

eye-witness estimated the crowd at 20,000.

By February, 1840, the Whigs were thoroughly

intoxicated with their hard cider campaign, and in a

57 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, December, 1839; February, 1840.

58 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), February 21, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850  461

frenzy over the rather dubious military glamour which

had grown up around Harrison with the passing of the

years since Tippecanoe and the War of 1812. Hard

cider and log cabins became the emblems of the Whig

cause, following an unfortunate remark of a corre-

spondent of a Baltimore paper to the effect that if

Harrison were given a pension of two thousand dollars

a year, plenty of hard cider, and a log cabin, he would

not concern himself with the presidency.⁵⁹ Instantly,

the phrase was seized by Whig campaigners and turned

to the advantage of the old General. Through these

emblems of western democracy, Harrison was identified

with the cause of the common man, and the campaign

became a kind of frenzied crusade to render justice to

the old Hero who had long suffered from popular

neglect. Democratic sneers, that Harrison was an old

granny, albeit a deserving old gentleman, who should

remain quietly in his cabin at North Bend, only served

to stimulate the popular imagination and to make Har-

rison the hero of the masses. Drunk with hard cider

and hero worship, the assembled thousands at the

famous February Convention indulged in all the fan-

tastic orgies of a revival.

The throng was called to order by Judge James

Wilson, of Steubenville.  Reasin Beall, of Wayne

County, a senatorial delegate to the National Con-

vention, became permanent chairman. Amid great en-

thusiasm, Thomas Corwin, the "Wagon Boy," was

nominated for governor. At the time, he was a repre-

sentative in Congress where he had achieved something

59 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, p. 562.

462      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

of a national reputation by his sparkling defense of the

military record of General Harrison. Previously, he

had served in the General Assembly of Ohio. The nom-

ination conformed to the specifications laid down by the

Cincinnati Gazette previous to the Convention; namely,

that no one should be selected who had taken a promi-

nent part in the abolition movement. For this reason,

Charles Anthony, President of the Colonization Society

of Ohio, and an opponent of abolitionism, and Judge

James Wilson, identified with the anti-slavery interests,

had proved unavailable.⁶⁰

The keynote of the resolutions of the Convention

was opposition to "executive" usurpation. It was de-

clared that the power of the president to appoint

and remove officers should be restricted within the

"narrowest limits allowed by the Constitution." Other

resolutions favored a single term for the president,

condemned the use of the veto "except to preserve the

Constitution from manifest violation," and denounced

the "spoils system" as well as official interference in

elections and the assessment of office-holders for elec-

tioneering purposes. It is particularly important to

notice the Whig declaration concerning a national bank,

because that question became the great issue during

Tyler's administration. The Columbus Convention re-

solved "That it is the duty of the General and State

Governments to secure a safe and uniform currency, as

well for the use of the people, as for the use of the

Government, so far as the same can be done without

transcending the constitutional limits of their authority

60 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, February 4, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850      463

--and that all laws, calculated to provide for the office-

holders a more safe or valuable currency than is pro-

vided for the people, tend to invert the natural order

of things--making the servant superior to the master,

--and are both oppressive and unjust." This declara-

tion was at once an effort to salve the feelings of State

Rights Whigs, like John G. Miller, and to satisfy the

Nationalist Whigs who wanted something done to sta-

bilize the currency. It aimed, moreover, to unite all

elements of the party in behalf of a system of currency

for all classes of the people.  The resolution was a

clever reference to the Democratic scheme for an Inde-

pendent Treasury which was portrayed as a plan to pay

the officers of the Government in gold and silver while

the people were forced to rely upon a depreciated paper

currency.61 The Convention concluded its labors by

urging the organization of "Harrison Reform Clubs"

all over the State, to be composed of former Jackson and

Van Buren followers.⁶² The Democrats described this

enthusiastic assemblage of Whigs as a "Federal Con-

vention of Abolitionists, Bankers, Officeholders, Mer-

chants, Lawyers and Doctors," and a list of delegates

most of whom were bank directors, bank stock-holders

and lawyers, was drawn up to expose the nature of the

party.⁶³ Whig pretensions to love for the common peo-

ple, moreover, were derided by the Democrats as mere

mockery.

61 Ohio Statesman, January 8, 9, 1840.

62 Proceedings of the Convention are taken from the Ohio State Journal

(Semi-weekly), February 26, 1840. The State Central Committee for the

ensuing year was to be composed of Alfred Kelley, Joseph Ridgway, John

W. Andrews, Robert Neil, John L. Miner, Francis Stewart, Lewis Heyl, Dr.

John G. Miller and Lyne Starling, Jr.

63 Ohio Statesman, February 22, 1840.

464        Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

Both parties, in 1840, threw the issues and principles

to the winds. The lack of a Whig platform and the am-

biguous character of their candidate made such cam-

paign strategy easy. The Democrats challenged both

Harrison's bravery and his genius as a commander. "If

a great General," wrote the Globe, "such was the equiv-

ocal character of his exploits that, whenever a victory

had been gained, it was difficult to tell whether it was

owing to his fortunate blunders, or won by others, in

spite of his imbecility."⁶⁴ As the Democratic Globe

pointed out, Harrison was, without doubt, "preferred to

his distinguished competitors, on the score of that ex-

emplary mediocrity for which he is so singularly illus-

trious." Corwin set out to rebut these reflections on

Harrison's military successes, in the halls of Congress,65

and so withering was his reply to General Isaac Crary,

of Michigan, who had attacked Harrison's record, that

the venerable John Quincy Adams's reference to the

"late General Crary" on the following day convulsed the

House with laughter.66

Giant rallies and conventions, at which the Whig

emblems of the log cabin and hard cider were much in

64 Washington Daily Globe, March 16, 1840.

65 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, March 26, 1840; Eaton Register, April 9,

1840.

66 Greeley, op. cit., p. 132; In the course of his defense of Harrison,

Corwin ridiculed the military qualifications of Crary declaring that "we all,

in fancy, now see the gentleman from Michigan in that most dangerous and

glorious event in the life of a militia general on the peace establishment--

a parade day! The day for which all other days of his life seem to have

been made. We can see the troops in motion; umbrellas, hoe- and ax-

handles and other like deadly implements of war overshadowing all the

field, when lo! the leader of the host approaches . . . his plume, white, after

the fashion of the great Bourbon, is of ample length, and reads its doleful

history in the bereaved necks and bosoms of forty neighboring hen-roosts!"

Josiah Morrow, Life and Speeches of Thomas Corwin, p. 250.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850  465

evidence, marked the campaign. One of the most

notable was at Fort Meigs, a spot almost sacred to the

Whigs because of the exploits of Harrison in that vi-

cinity. The old General himself promised to attend and

for days excited crowds from all over the State streamed

to that point. Alfred Kelley, one of the most prominent

Whigs in Ohio, who accompanied Harrison to the scene

of his earlier triumphs, described the journey as a "tri-

umphal procession" made so by large assemblages who

gathered at all the stopping places, and mingled their

shouts with the booming salutes fired in honor of "Old

Tip."67 At Fort Meigs, 40,000 milled around endlessly

to get a close view of their Hero. There was a sham

attack on the old fort by a band of Indians, a speech by

Thomas Ewing, as chairman of the Convention, and

some remarks by the old General himself. An eye-wit-

ness described the appearance of the mob after Harri-

son came out to speak, as follows: "What now shall we

say of that multitude? Could the presence of Van Buren

inspire such a feeling as at that moment animated every

bosom? Here was no selfish feeling--the merchant--

the farmer--the mechanic--the rich and the poor--all

were here united in one thought. They were here in

their might--and in the venerable form before them,

they recognized a connecting link in that great chain of

patriotism, which had bound a Republic together, from

its birth to the present day. A chieftain was there who

led their armies on from victory to victory--one who

had been clothed with trust without abusing it--whose

fame was written in the crumbling breastworks, bastions,

batteries and traverses, which everywhere surrounded

67 Alfred Kelley to Follett, June 14, 1840, quoted in "Selections from

the Follett Papers, IV," 1916; loc. cit., v. XI, No. 1, p. 21.

Vol. XXXVII--30.

466      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

them. . . And well did they appreciate his services

--for sure never before, was enthusiasm greater--never

before was a loftier shout borne upon the breezes of

heaven."68 The state was filled with stories of General

Harrison's devotion to the welfare of the poor.

Conventions of a similar nature were held at Cin-

cinnati, Columbus, Cleveland, Dayton and at many other

points. At Cincinnati, the attendance was estimated at

25,000. Numerous banners proclaimed the issues of

the campaign and bore inscriptions like "Farmers, Me-

chanics, Manufacturers, Merchants, Laborers, against

Locofocism," "Van Caught in a Whig Trap," (showing

Van Buren caught in a log cabin baited with hard cider),

"For Jackson we did but for Van we can't," and "No

Standing Army; Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to

God."69 The last evidently referred to the proposal of

the Secretary of War, Joel R. Poinsett, for a standing

army of two hundred thousand men to be distributed

over the United States in eight military districts.70 In

point of numbers, however, the greatest rally of the

whole campaign was held at Dayton, on September 1.

The estimate of 100,000 people was undoubtedly an

over-statement. Thousands gathered around the Gen-

eral's stand to hear him deny the many charges which

the Democrats had made against him. Harrison de-

clared that he was opposed to the use of the veto except

in extreme cases and that he favored a single term for

the president. He firmly denied that he had ever been

68 Perrysburg Whig quoted in Ohio State Journal (Weekly), June 24,

1840; an account is also given in Randall and Ryan, History of Ohio,

v. IV, pp. 37-39.

69 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October 3, 1840.

70 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, July 22, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850            467

a Federalist, but would not commit himself on the ques-

tion of a national bank. Apparently, there was no spe-

cific power in the Constitution to create a bank. Harri-

son asserted that he thought that he would favor a bank

if the powers granted to Congress could not be carried

into effect without such an institution, and if the wishes

of the people were made manifest in favor of a bank.

The remainder of his speech consisted of typically dem-

agogic appeals to the provincialism of the frontiers-

man.71 The Ohio delegation to the Whig convention of

young men in Baltimore carried the banner of the State

with the inscription "She offers her Cincinnatus to re-

deem the Republic."72

Another characteristic feature of the campaign of

1840 was the effective use that was made of the "Buck-

eye Blacksmith," a man who, by his character and meth-

ods, typified the Whig appeal to the country in 1840.

The "Buckeye Blacksmith," John W. Bear of Zanes-

ville, first attracted public attention by his oratorical

efforts at the Whig State Convention of February 21-22,

1840. Without the least pretense to an education, this

natural-born orator appealed to the prejudices of the

71 Harrison's speech and the account of the meeting is given in Ohio

State Journal (Weekly), September 23, 1840; account of meeting given

in Cincinnati Daily Gazette, September 12, 1840, and in Randall and Ryan,

op. cit., v. IV, pp. 39-40.

72 The Cincinnati Daily Gazette appealed to the Whigs of the State,

and particularly of Cincinnati to send a large delegation to a meeting held

in Nashville, August 17, because of the close commercial relations existing

between Cincinnati and the South and West. Bellamy Storer and S. S.

L'Hommedieu of Cincinnati took prominent parts in the Nashville meeting,

and Senator Hugh L. White of Tennessee was lauded for his refusal to

follow the Van Buren administration and for his resignation from the senate

when instructed by the Tennessee Legislature to support the Independent

Treasury scheme. Daily Gazette, August 8, 1840.

468      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

poor against the rich, and soon won the name of "rab-

ble-rouser." His mere support of the Whigs was an

effective argument against the Democratic claim that

their party represented the "bone and sinew" of the

land. Bear's fame spread throughout the State and mul-

titudes flocked to hear him. From Ohio he was taken to

other states where he continued his phenomenal suc-

cesses. For his services he later was appointed by Pres-

iden Harrison to the Wyandot Indian Agency, only to

be removed by Tyler.73

As an aid in the contest to end "executive usurpa-

tion" the Whigs started many campaign papers. One

of these, the Harrison Flag, announced itself as a volun-

teer in the cause of the people in order to furnish an

"anti-dote" for the "poisons" spread abroad by Demo-

cratic papers like the Globes and Statesmans.74 The

Daily Political Tornado declared that its chief purpose

was to expose the greatest liar of the age, Samuel Med-

ary, editor of the Ohio Statesman.⁷⁵ Other new Harrison

papers were the Investigator and Expositor of Troy, the

Calumet and the War-Club of Springfield, the Harrison

Democrat of Hamilton, the Log Cabin Herald of Chilli-

cothe, the Straight-Out Harrisonian of Columbus, and

the Axe of Cleveland.76 These new papers, adept as

they were in broadcasting the homely virtues of their

own candidates and in repeating the stories of the aristo-

cratic tendencies of Van Buren, exercised a tremendous

influence over the voters of Ohio. Their appeals were

the essence of the log cabin arguments.

73 Randall and Ryan, op. cit., v. IV, pp. 34-37.

74 The Harrison Flag, (Delaware, Ohio), April 28, 1840.

75 Daily Political Tornado, October 6, 1840.

76 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, May 14, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850       469

In Ohio, the Independent Treasury constituted a con-

venient point of attack for the Whigs and upon this

measure they poured all the venom of their denuncia-

tions. It became a definite issue in Ohio politics when

the General Assembly (D), in January, 1840, adopted

resolutions instructing the Ohio senators and requesting

the Ohio representatives to vote for the Independent

Treasury.77 The Ohio Whigs considered it as little

short of "national suicide to add the weight of the public

treasury to a power so fearfully vast, and consign the

entire charge of the National purse to a band of trained

partisans, who have never been remarkable for honesty.

. . ."⁷⁸ They declared that the Independent Treas-

ury Bill contained no provision for the benefit of the

people, nothing to restore healthy exchanges, nothing to

place the people's and the Government's money on a par,

and nothing to correct a disordered currency or encour-

age the laboring class. "The money goes from its iron

cages to pay office-holders and great contractors, who

are enriching themselves from the national funds."79

The Eaton Register described the passage of the Inde-

pendent Treasury as the triumph of "Vandals" and the

"minions of a contemptuous Executive."80 The Whigs

argued, furthermore, that the measure would reduce the

price of labor and lands, and enhance the value of slave

labor, and predicted the direst consequences.81 The

77 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, January 16, 1840.

78 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), August 21, 1839.

79 Ibid., September 10, 1839.

80 Eaton Register, July 16, 1840.

81 An editorial in the Albany Daily Advertiser described the Independ-

ent Treasury as "a moneyed despotism in its most odious form--the despot-

ism of a central consolidated government, strengthened by a monster bank,

owned and controlled by the officeholders . . ." quoted in Eaton Register,

January 16, 1840.

470       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

measure was designed, according to the Ohio Whigs, to

depress the commercial, industrial, and agricultural in-

terests of the North in favor of the "grasping avarice

of the pampered South."⁸² Most of all, it involved a

union of the purse and the sword and endangered the

liberties of the people. In developing this last point, the

Whigs made a great deal of the proposals of Van

Buren's Secretary of War, Joel R. Poinsett, to increase

the size of the army. "The whole shows plainly, to our

mind," declared the Cincinnati Daily Gazette, "that the

great thing which Martin Van Buren's administration

contemplates, and which it is endeavoring by all means

to bring about, is a full and effective union of the purse

and sword;"⁸³ and the Eaton Register saw in this scheme

real danger to the liberties of citizens and a violation of

the Constitution.84 Samuel Medary recognized that

Democratic strength was crumbling under these attacks,

and complained to Van Buren that it was remarkable

what a "humbug" had been made out of Poinsett's pro-

posal. "The standing army of 200,000 men is wrung

on every change," he wrote, "and every attempt to ex-

plain only seemed to give force to their declarations."⁸⁵

One of the most damaging charges of the Democrats

against Harrison was that his ignorance of public af-

fairs made it necessary that he be guarded by a com-

mittee from making indiscreet utterances during the

82 Eaton Register, April 23, 1840.

83 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, April 29, 1840.

84 Eaton Register, April 30, 1840.

85 Medary to Van Buren, August 18, 1840, Van Buren MSS., v. XL.

The Columbiana County Democrats defended the Poinsett plan on the

grounds that it was the true English policy of resistance to tyranny, and

pointed out that in 1817, while a member of the House, Harrison had urged

a system of general military instruction. Ohio Statesman, April 17, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850      471

campaign. A letter of inquiry from Niles Hotchkiss of

the Union Association of Oswego, New York, addressed

to Harrison, seemed to give some support to this charge.

The reply to Hotchkiss's letter came from David

Gwynne, John C. Wright, and 0. M. Spencer of Cincin-

nati, who described themselves as Harrison's "confiden-

tial committee." This triumvirate, referred to by the

Democrats as the keepers of the General's conscience or

the muzzling committee, announced that it was the pol-

icy of the General to make no more public declarations

of principles because his views on present policies might

be judged by his past actions and utterances.86 The

Globe described the committee as the "mysterious con-

clave that presides over his conscience and opinions" and

declared that Harrison's public utterances convicted him

of "Abolitionism, Bankism, Latitudinarianism,"⁸⁷ and

the Ohio Statesman ridiculed Harrison and his commit-

tee of politicians.88 Whig orators and Harrison him-

self denied these charges vigorously, declaring that

there was no attempt to conceal the candidate's views,

but that so many letters of inquiry had arrived that it

was necessary to establish a committee to answer them.⁸⁹

In an effort to counteract the growing wave of de-

mocracy behind Harrison's candidacy, the Democrats

dug up a charge that he had voted in favor of selling

86 Letters from Hotchkiss to Harrison and from the committee to

Hotchkiss are taken from Washington Daily Globe, March 25, 1840. The

Globe reprinted them from the Oswego Palladium. Wright became editor

of the Cincinnati Gazette upon the death of Hammond in 1840. In 1840,

he ran for the Ohio Senate but was defeated by Holmes (D) after a

contest which stretched out over a large part of the legislative session of

1840-1841.

87 Washington Daily Globe, March 25, 1840.

88 Ohio Statesman, June 9, 1840.

89 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, April 6, June 30, 1840.

472      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

poor white men into slavery.90 So damaging was this

accusation that the Whigs found it advisable to conduct

a minute investigation into the records of the General

Assembly of Ohio. This brought to light that Harrison,

in 1820-1821, had voted against an amendment to abol-

ish that feature of a law authorizing the sheriff to

sell offenders to those persons who would pay the fine

and costs of his prisoners. The Whigs defended Har-

rison's position by pointing out that the prisoner, dur-

ing his period of service, was protected from abuse in

the same manner as apprentices; that if the offender

were willing, he could work out his fine on the public

highways; that if he were unable to pay the fine and

physically unable to work he might be discharged from

prison; and that only convicted offenders of the penal

laws of the State could be sold into service.91  Repre-

sentative Mason of Ohio undertook to defend Harrison

from this charge in Congress.92

In spite of the efforts of the leaders of both parties

to keep it out, the anti-slavery question was injected into

the campaign of 1840. Chiefly as the result of a strug-

gle in Congress over the right of petition in which Cal-

houn and Adams represented the extreme viewpoints of

the South and the North on the slavery question, the

one favoring the right, the other opposing it, the right

of petition had become a burning issue all over the coun-

try after 1837. In reality, the Congressional contest

was a struggle for the constitutional right of petition

which was assailed by the friends of slavery because it

endangered the security of slave property and even the

90 Ohio Statesman, April 7, 1840.

91 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), April 22, 1840.

92 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, April 30, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850       473

existence of the Union. Calhoun had stated his position

in the form of six resolutions designed to protect slavery

against further attack from abolitionist petitions. He

was answered by Thomas Morris of Ohio in a set of

resolutions asserting that slavery was sinful and im-

moral, and that Congress had a constitutional right to

abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and in the

Territories.93 The result of this debate was the passage,

by the House of Representatives, of the Patton "gag"

resolutions by which that body refused to print or read

abolition petitions.94 The immediate effect of this ef-

fort at repression was an increase in the number of such

petitions. Protests against the gag resolution as a vio-

lation of the Constitution poured into Congress, Ohio

alone sending thirty,95 but the House adhered to its res-

olution.96 Anti-slavery sentiment increased as a conse-

quence throughout the free states. The issue now in-

volved a struggle for the right of petition. Many who

scorned connections with the abolitionists, were alarmed

by the constitutional issues raised by the struggle in

Congress.

The Ohio Whigs insisted that the gag resolutions

were violations of the sacred right of petition, and

pointed out that the six Ohio votes cast in its favor were

the votes of Democrats.97 The Ohio Statesman, how-

ever, declared that the controversy over the reception

of abolition petitions was merely a "humbug branch of

93 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, pp. 482-484.

94 Ibid., op. cit., v. VI, p. 489.

95 Ibid., v. VI, p. 490.

96 Ibid., v. VI, pp. 510-511.

97 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, February 13, 1840. The Ohio Democrats

who voted for the gag resolution were John B. Weller, Isaac Parrish,

D. P. Leadbetter, William Medill, Jonathan Taylor, and George Sweeney.

474      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

Harrison Whiggery," and maintained that by "putting

this federal firebrand to rest Congress [had] saved the

nation a million a year."98 All the rioting over the slav-

ery issue during the past few years, was attributed by

the St. Clairsville Gazette (D), to abolitionists whose

"spurious" martyrdom failed to aid the slave and only

served to alienate one portion of the country from

another.99 Clay's opposition to the abolitionist petitions

was strongly condemned by the Cincinnati Daily Ga-

zette, a Clay paper. On the 25th of May, 1839, Clay

wrote a letter to a Whig county committee in Kentucky

justifying his position. He argued that "In the Consti-

tution of the Union there is not a solitary provision,

fairly interpreted and fairly administered, which au-

thorizes any interference of Congress with Domestic

Slavery, as it exists in the United States." To this as-

sertion the Gazette took exception, and pointed to in-

stances where the Government had aided in the return

of slaves.100 Partly in consequence of this issue, the

abolition press hailed the selection of Harrison over Clay

as a victory for their cause. This was especially true of

the Emancipator, the Liberator and the Philanthropist,

which chose to interpret the nomination of Harrison as

a concession to the anti-slavery sentiment of the coun-

try; and the Oberlin Evangelist argued that no slave-

holder could ever again be president of the United

States.¹⁰¹ The Democratic Ohio Statesman, anxious to

fasten the taint of abolitionism on the Whigs, told its

readers that Harrison, if elected, would use the surplus

98 Ohio Statesman, February 3, 1840.

99 St. Clairsville Gazette quoted in Ohio Statesman, February 6, 1840.

100 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, August 26, 1839.

101 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, pp. 560-561.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850        475

revenue of the Government to buy negroes "to be set

free to overrun our country,"102 and the Democrats ap-

pealed to the economic interests of northern white la-

bourers by the argument that the abolitionists would fill

the towns and villages of the North with blacks, thus

"degrading labor where they could get it, and stealing

and robbing where they could not."103

The position of the anti-slavery men in Ohio was not

as yet sharply defined. To 1839, they had generally

repudiated separate political action and had resorted

to questioning the candidates of both parties on the

slavery issue in order to throw their votes to those who

gave the most favorable replies. In this manner, for

example, they had aided in the election of Joshua R.

Giddings to Congress in 1838. But this method proved

disappointing in 1839 when several men supported by

the Anti-Slavery Society voted for a Fugitive Slave

Law at the request of Kentucky slaveholders. As a

result, the anti-slavery men in the Western Reserve

forced the Whigs to repudiate some of the men who had

voted for the Fugitive Slave Law, and to accept other

candidates, notably Benjamin F. Wade. But Wade was

defeated because of Whig antipathy to his strong anti-

slavery  position.104  Although    the  American    Anti-

Slavery Society in July, 1839, resolved to support no

one who was not an abolitionist, the Ohio branch, meet-

ing at Massillon, June 10, 1840, decided that it was

102 Ohio Statesman quoted in Washington Daily Globe, January 13, 1840.

103 Ohio Statesman, January 17, 1840.

104 T. C. Smith, Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the Northwest (Har-

vard Historical Studies, v. VI, pp. 30-32.) I have relied upon this study

to a large extent for the history of the Liberty party but I have supple-

mented it in some particulars, such as the attitude of the old parties toward

the Liberty and Free Soil parties.

476      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

strictly a "moral" society and each member should de-

termine his own political course.105 Both major parties

naturally were unfriendly to all proposals to have the

Society resort to separate political action.  The Cin-

cinnati Daily Gazette declared that "A resort to the

ballot-box. . . [was] a resort to means illy in ac-

cordance with the kindly influences upon the judgments

and Christian feeling of the community."¹⁰⁶ The Whig

state organ condemned, in vigorous terms, the sending

of abolition petitions to Congress, although it upheld

their constitutionality, and explained that it seemed "to

follow that no attempt should be made on the part of

those not directly interested, to lessen the security by

which this species of property is held, or to diminish its

value in the hands of its holders." Anti-slavery organi-

zations should not send publications "into the slave-

holding states for the purpose of creating disaffection in

the minds of their citizens in regard to their municipal

regulations; much less to foment a spirit of insubordi-

nation among the slaves."¹⁰⁷

The leaders of the Anti-Slavery Society in Ohio pre-

vented the American Anti-Slavery Society, meeting at

Cleveland in October, 1839, from taking action looking

toward the organization of an independent political

party,108 but anti-slavery men who favored the forma-

tion of a separate political party met in April, 1840, and

formed the National Liberty Party, nominating James

G. Birney for president and Thomas Earle of Pennsyl-

vania for vice-president. For many years, Birney, a

105 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, June 10, 1840.

106 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, August 22, 1840.

107 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), July 22, 1840.

108 T. C. Smith, op. cit., pp. 36-37.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850            477

former Kentucky slave-holder, had been active in the

anti-slavery crusade, and, by his work as editor of the

Philanthropist, he had become the recognized leader of

the anti-slavery forces in the United States. The Lib-

erty party had only one idea, to prevent the extension

of slavery and to abolish that institution in the District

of Columbia. The Ohio Anti-Slavery men thus were

faced with a dilemma, but the split of the National or-

ganization of the American Anti-Slavery Society on this

issue in 1840 made it easy for the Whig and Democratic

elements to remain in their old parties. The Ohio Anti-

Slavery Society, on May 27, 1840, refused to take inde-

pendent action as an organization. However, those who

favored separate political action met in September and

formed the Ohio Liberty Party, whose prime movers

were Dr. Gamaliel Bailey, editor of the Philanthropist,

a mild advocate of separate political action, and ex-

Senator Thomas Morris, who had just been discarded by

the Democrats on account of his attitude on the recep-

tion of anti-slavery petitions.109

The Whigs were anxious to secure the support of the

abolitionists, but feared the effect of such a coalition on

the party in the South.110 The praise bestowed on Har-

rison by the abolition press led the Democrats to charge

109 T. C. Smith, op. cit., pp. 41-42.

110 The Belmont Chronicle, September 17, 1839, reproved an ardent anti-

slavery correspondent with the assertion that "The men of the Southern

states, having been accustomed to the system or institution of slavery from

their infancy, are so familiarized to it that they cannot view it in the same

light that most men in the free states do, and though even slaveholders

themselves might and did admit that it would be morally wrong if the

immediate abolition of it were at all practicable, immediately to abolish, but

also that they do no wrong in holding them to service; since it is in accord-

ance with law and recognized by the constitutions of the slave states;

while they are well used--humanly treated."

478      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

a coalition between the Whigs and Abolitionists and to

claim that Harrison was an abolitionist. Indeed, in a

speech at Vincennes, Indiana, three or four years pre-

viously, Harrison had apparently favored the use of the

surplus revenue of the General Government for the

emancipation of slaves.111 Moreover, a statement by

Bailey, the abolitionist leader, that Harrison was a warm

friend of the abolition cause was circulated widely over

Ohio. This report, Bailey took occasion to deny in a

letter to the Cincinnati Gazette, although he weakened

the effect of his letter by the statement that from con-

versations with Harrison he judged him to be a "very

good anti-slavery man."¹¹² The Globe saw proof in this

tone of the Philanthropist of a coalition of Abolitionism

and Federalism.113 In view of the fact that the anti-

slavery forces were divided on the advisability of inde-

pendent political action, and that such abolition papers

as the Elyria Atlas, the New Lisbon Aurora, and the

Xenia Free Press openly supported Harrison,¹¹4 it was

plain that most of the abolition votes would go to the old

General. Moreover, the Liberty party in 1840 did not

yet include such able strategists as Salmon P. Chase,

Benjamin F. Wade, Edward Wade, Leicester King, and

Samuel Lewis.115

In the interests of national success the Ohio Whigs

were anxious to disavow any connection with abolition-

ism because of the effects on the party in the South.

Professor A. C. Cole has clearly shown that the Whig

111 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), January 18, 1840.

112 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, July 9, 1840.

113 Washington Daily Globe, March 7, May 8, 1840.

114 Ibid., June 9, 1840.

115 T. C. Smith, op. cit., p. 40.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850        479

party in the South was preeminently the party of the

slaveholder,116 and that the southern Whigs consciously

modified their position on slavery questions in order to

conciliate the northern wing of the party.117 The north-

ern Whigs were anxious to meet their southern allies at

least half-way. The Political Tornado, a campaign

sheet, assured the Whigs of the South that the rumors

of Harrison's abolitionism were unfounded, and pointed

to one of Harrison's speeches in Indiana condemning

"measures of emancipation" as "weak, presumptuous,

and unconstitutional."118 Harrison, himself, specifically

denied the abolitionist connection, in a speech at Colum-

bus, by pointing to his vote, while a member of Congress,

against restrictions on the admission of Missouri.119

These charges and denials continued to the close of the

campaign.120

In an effort to distract public attention from Harri-

son's connection with the anti-slavery movement, the

Whigs charged that Benjamin Tappan, the Democratic

United States Senator, was not only an abolitionist but

an "amalgamationist." He was accused of having said,

in a court decision in 1818, that he knew of no principle

of ethics or law "which would forbid a descendant of

the fair-haired and ruddy Teuton from marrying the

swarthy native of Africa; good taste and refinement, but

neither law nor morals forbid such connections.^"121 The

116 A. C. Cole, The Whig Party in the South, p. 104.

117 Ibid., pp. 106-108.

118 Daily Political Tornado, October 17., 1840.

119 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, June 30, 1840; Eaton Register, July 9, 1840.

120 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October 28, 1840.

121 Steubenville Herald quoted in Belmont Chronicle, March 17, 1840.

The reference is to Judge Tappan's decision in the case of Barrett vs.

Jarvis, Tappan's Reports, v. I, p. 211.

480      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

Democrats hastened to protect Tappan, who had been

sent to the Senate by the Democrats of Ohio after they

had discarded Morris because of his ardent support of

the anti-slavery movement from such charges. Tappan

refused to present abolition petitions to the Senate, al-

though he informed the Senate that he held them, and

he was commended highly by the Globe for his action.¹²²

The Ohio Statesman declared that "At this moment,

while abolitionism is rearing its haggard head anew

under the auspices of General Harrison"--Tappan's

action "comes at this time upon the enemy like an ava-

lanche, burying the puny intrigues of Harrison and in-

cendiarism in one common grave together."123 Tap-

pan's action, moreover, was applauded even by such a

staunch Whig organ as the Cincinnati Daily Gazette,

always eager to remain in harmony with its southern

neighbors and to preserve its economic connections with

the South.124

The vote of newly-arrived immigrants also became

important in Ohio in the election of 1840. Between

1830 and 1850 large numbers of foreigners had come to

Ohio. Most of the newcomers were Germans, Irish,

and English. Although both parties angled for the sup-

port of the newcomers, the Germans and Irish drifted

into the ranks of the Democrats,¹²⁵ due partly to the

sound of the party name; partly to the hard money

tendencies of the Democrats; and partly to the effective-

ness of the Democratic campaign to convince them that

the Whigs retained the Federalist enmity toward for-

122 Washington Daily Globe, February 13, 1840.

123 Ohio Statesman, February 10, 1840.

124 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, February 15, 1840.

125 Ibid., March 7, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-18       481

eigners. In an effort to detach the foreigners from their

democratic connections, fulsome compliments were paid

to the Germans by the Whig press, the Ohio State Jour-

nal declaring that there was not a "more honest, indus-

trious and patriotic class of citizens than the Germans."

The Journal did not fear the effects of the foreign vote

although many foreigners had been led astray by "skil-

ful and corrupt demagogues."¹²⁶ The Cincinnati Daily

Gazette deplored the fact that there were 1200 German

voters in Cincinnati in 1840 with no means to introduce

them to sound Whig doctrines.127 The Democrats had

the advantage of German language newspapers like the

Westbote in Cincinnati, and the Ohio Staats-Zeitung

und Volks-Advokat in Columbus.¹²⁸ Charged by the

Cincinnati Volksblatt with hostility to foreigners, John

C. Wright, editor of the Daily Gazette, protested his

sympathy for the foreign-born, and announced that he

favored a short residence requirement for naturaliza-

tion.129 The Democrats accused Harrison of favoring

a naturalization period of twenty years, and Harrison

found it necessary to deny this report and to assert his

sympathy with the foreigners in their efforts to become

citizens.130 The Whigs also directed attention to Harri-

son's efforts to amend the Land Law of 1800 to provide

for the sale of smaller tracts of land. "The effects of

General Harrison's exertions at that time," declared the

Cincinnati Republican, "was to give every industrious

German--every honest Irishman--who would receive it,

126 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), September 11, 1839.

127 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, June 3, 1840.

128 Ohio State Journal (Semi-weekly), June 7, 1839.

129 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October 6, 1840.

130 Ibid., July 28, 1840.

Vol. XXXVII--31.

482       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

the right to be a landholder and a land owner."¹³¹ The

only danger of the defection of the foreign vote from

the Democratic party came from Van Buren's policy in

regard to American neutrality during the Canadian re-

volt of 1837.132 When William Lyon Mackenzie, one

of the Canadian revolutionaries, was arrested and im-

prisoned by New York authorities because of his viola-

tion of American neutrality,133 William Dunbar, a Dem-

ocratic leader of Canton, Ohio, warned Bela Latham, a

state leader of the Ohio Democracy, that if Van Buren

did not pardon Mackenzie the Irish and Germans of the

Canton district would turn against the party. The

Whigs apparently were taking full advantage of the

strong anti-British feeling aroused by the Canadian re-

bellion and consequent border troubles, and the Demo-

cratic State Central Committee found it advisable to

send an address to Van Buren urging the release of

Mackenzie.134 According to Whig accounts most of the

foreign born voters remained in the ranks of the Demo-

crats.  The Cincinnati Daily Gazette charged Demo-

cratic leaders with inciting foreigners to vote before

they were naturalized, and denounced such as "revolu-

tionary" and "disorganizing" tactics. The Whigs were

advised to secure proper constitutional limitations upon

voting privileges to prevent such abuses in the future.¹³⁵

131 Cincinnati Republican quoted in Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October

9, 1840.

132 McMaster, op. cit., v. VI, pp. 434-442.

133 Ibid., v. VI, p. 442.

134 William Dunbar to Bela Latham, February 10, 1840, Van Buren

MSS., v. XXXVIII.

135 In spite of predictions of trouble by the foreigners the election passed

off in an orderly manner, a fact attributed by the Gazette to the activities

of the influential men in both parties. Cincinnati Daily Gazette, October

12, 14, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850   483

After the election was over, the native American spirit

again manifested itself in the Whig party press, the Cin-

cinnati Daily Gazette quoting with approval an editorial

from the Troy Mail to the effect that Americans were

under obligations to maintain their political and social

institutions undefiled and that foreigners should not set

up arrogant claims or reveal a spirit of officiousness or

dictation, but should be modest in their demands.136

The outcome of the campaign of 1840 in Ohio de-

pended on the ability of the Whigs to attract large num-

bers of former Jackson Democrats. It was this consid-

eration that had led to the rejection of their real leader,

Henry Clay, in favor of Harrison. The old Jackson

group never could have been induced to support Clay

whom they accused of betraying their hero in the elec-

tion of 1824. Conscious of this veneration for Jackson

among the masses, Whig papers referred to Jackson

with the utmost respect and emphasized Van Buren's,

alleged desertion of Jacksonian principles. A state

rights element in Ohio led by John G. Miller, editor of

the Ohio Confederate and Old School Republican, and

his associate, Robert Ware, vaguely emphasized the need

for reform in the Government,137 and it was around this

active organization of state rights men that the Whigs

hoped to unite all who were discontented with Van Bur-

en and once had been followers of Jackson. At a meet-

ing of the State Rights Association of Columbus, in

January, 1840, D. W. Deshler was chosen president,

Isaac Taylor, vice-president, and George Jeffries, secre-

tary. A resolutions committee, composed of N. M. Mil-

136 Troy Mail quoted in Cincinnati Daily Gazette, December 5, 1840.

137 Ohio Confederate and Old School Republican, August 6, 1840.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850     485

True American Association" with John McElvain, a

former follower of Jackson, as chairman. At the sug-

gestion of the "Jackson Reform Club" of Newark, a

State Convention of discontented Jacksonians was held

on September 25th.139 In July, 1840, the State Rights

organization and the defection movement of old Jack-

sonians were merged in a meeting held at the State Capi-

tol, and an address was drawn up commending the Jack-

sonian principles of 1828 and declaring that Harrison

rather than Van Buren now was the true exponent of

these views.140 The Ohio Confederate and Old School

Republican called upon the Jacksonians who had been

deceived by Van Buren to redeem the Government from

the spoilers.141 The State Convention of former Jack-

sonians and States Rights men, on the 25th of Septem-

ber, attracted about 7,000. Resolutions were adopted

condemning the Van Buren administration.142 The

Democrats, of course, attempted to minimize the extent

of the defection in their ranks and labelled the deserters

as disappointed office-seekers.143

More important than the organized State Rights-

Jackson movement, was the claim of the Whigs that they

represented the ideals of Jefferson and were the real

"bone and sinew" of the land. Democratic conventions

were denounced as conventions of pampered office-hold-

ers, and the campaign became a crusade to rid the Gov-

ernment of the spoilers. "The Spoilers are in the temple

of Liberty, and foul corruption has polluted the sacred

altar of Freedom,"144 declared the chairman at a con-

139 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), September 9, 1840.

140 Ibid., July 8, 1840.

141 Ohio Confederate and Old School Republican, September 3, 1840.

142 Ohio State Journal (Weekly), October 7, 1840.

143 Ohio Statesman, March 6, 1840.

144 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, June 12, 1840.

486       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

vention of the Whigs on the Tippecanoe Battle-ground.

In order to win the masses, and rid the party of any

odious connection with Federalism, Whig leaders even

denied the right of the Democrats to use the party name.

"What odious cant is it," exclaimed the Cincinnati Ga-

zette, "for the Locofocos to arrogate the title of the

'democracy' of the United States! .  .  .  What evi-

dence have they given of their sympathies with the

masses of the people? .  .  .   Has not their opposi-

tion to internal improvements of the country, by canals,

turnpikes, and railroads, with their malignant attack on

the credit of the States, thrown the class first named

[laborers] out of employment, by hundreds and thou-

sands? .  .  .  Has not their incessant war upon the

currency of the country depreciated the value of lands,

reduced the price of proceeds two-thirds and rendered

the farmer's occupation, hitherto one of independence

and profit, a life of hardships and half-recompensing

toil?"145   Van Buren, on account of his aristocratic

tastes, was declared to be the real Federalist.146

The suffering which followed in the Panic of 1837

and led to a deranged currency and falling prices, also

proved a powerful argument for the Whigs in the cam-

paign of 1840.147 The Whigs promised to better the

economic status of the common people,148 and spread

145 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, May 1, 1840.

146 Ohio State Journal (for the period of the campaign).

147 The "pampered office-holders," they said, were making no efforts

to better these conditions, but were only interested in collecting gold and

silver for their own use. The Whig press declared that all classes of people,

impelled by the palpable ruin which faced them, were ready to join the

cause of Harrison and reform. Belmont Chronicle, March 24, 1840; Ohio

State Journal (Semi-weekly), February 8, 1840.

148 Ohio State Journal stressed this note throughout the campaign.

Party Politics in Ohio, 1840-1850     487

broadcast over the State information about the high sal-

aries paid to useless Government officials.¹⁴⁹ Harrison,

the plain man, mingled with farmers and mechanics,

and was interested in their welfare; Van Buren, the

aristocrat, enjoyed the "fat of the land" and spent most

of his time "shut up in glittering halls, with a few

friends about him, of tastes, habits and character sim-

ilar to his own."150 Whig journals contrasted the low

wages of workingmen with the salary of the President,

who "lived in a splendid palace supplied and furnished

at the nation's expense" and rode "in an English coach,

accompanied by liveried outriders and drawn by six

blooded horses."¹⁵¹ In creating this impression of pres-

idential aristocracy, nothing was more effective than the

famous speech of Representative Ogle of Pennsylvania

on the civil and diplomatic Appropriation Bill (April

14, 1840). It disclosed alleged executive extravagances

and was circulated throughout the State by the Whig

papers under the caption, "On the Regal Splendor of

the President's Palace."152 Medary confessed to Van

Buren that the furore over the standing army and the

Ogle "omnibus of lies" were the most potent arguments

of the Whigs.¹⁵³  One Whig paper explained that in the

event of a re-election of Van Buren, twenty thousand

dollars would be required to "replenish the Turkish car-

pets, re-polish the plate, candelabras and mirrors and

enlarge the means of luxurious indulgence generally,

which already exist in oriental profusion and magnifi-

149 Cincinnati Daily Gazette, June 11, 1840.

150 Ibid., April 20, 1840.

151 Ibid., March 5, 1840.