ters. Mass meetings were held in various States; consultations were held in others. In various regions throughout the Southern section open professions to ignore instructions were heard on all sides, while here and there a delegate resigned to avoid embarrassment.

Democratic convention of 1844. In the midst of the excitement the convention met. All the States except South Carolina, which felt somewhat humiliated at the turn of affairs, were represented by three hundred and twenty-five delegates. The former rule of apportionment, giving each State the number of votes equal to its electoral vote, was adopted. The convention thus cast but two hundred and sixty-six votes. Early in the convention an attempt was made to adopt the two-thirds rule. A vigorous opposition to the rule at once developed, causing it to be tabled for the time being, but it was brought up again at the earliest opportunity. At last the force of precedent prevailed and the rule became again the order of the Democratic party. It was observed that the Van Buren contingent opposed the rule. Its adoption therefore on the second day was a distinct warning to him. An analysis of the vote indicated a sectional division. There were one hundred and sixty-one votes from the Northern section, and, omitting the State of South Carolina, there were one hundred and five votes from the Southern section of the country. The first ballot revealed seven candidates, voted for, namely: Van Buren, who received 146 votes, 32 short of the necessary two-thirds; Cass of Michigan, 83; Johnson of Kentucky, 24; Calhoun, 6; Buchanan of Pennsylvania, 4; Woodbury of New Hampshire, 2; and Stewart of Pennsylvania, 1. For seven ballots Van Buren gradually declined from 146 to 99. While Cass gradually increased from 83 to 123, his highest. On the eighth ballot the vote stood: Van Buren, 104; Cass, 114; Buchanan, 2; Calhoun, 2; and Polk, the "Dark Horse," 44.

Polk nominated. On the ninth and last ballot the vote stood: Van Buren, 2; Cass, 29; and Polk, 233. Prior to this drift

toward Polk, an effort was made to rescind the two-thirds rule and declare Van Buren the nominee by virtue of his having received a majority vote of the delegates on the first ballot. This effort proved fruitless, making it evident that Van Buren could not be nominated. After another ballot his name was withdrawn. Texas agitation was responsible. The slavery question was at the bottom of the Texas agitation. For the first time the minority, representing the slavocracy, dictated the nomination for President. A further analysis of the vote shows that Van Buren had received 134 of the 161 votes from the Northern section, and only 12 of the 105 votes from the Southern section. This was the beginning of that fratricidal struggle which set one part of the country against the other, and lit the fires of sectional strife which blazed with increasing fury until they enveloped the entire nation in the conflagration of civil war.

Contest over Vice-President. Silas Wright of New York was nominated for Vice-President. He at once declined the honor, perhaps because he held similar views with Van Buren upon the Texas question. After an attempt to induce him to reconsider his position had failed, two ballots were taken to decide the contest between Fairfield of Maine, Woodbury, Cass, Johnson, Marcy, of New York, Stewart and Dallas. The contest was decided in favor of Dallas who received 220 votes of the 256 cast for candidates for Vice-President..

The platform. The convention adopted the platform of the party in 1840, and added a resolution concerning the application of the proceeds of the sales of public lands to national objects; another defending the use of the veto power in the President; and still another on the duty of the government to reoccupy Oregon and reannex Texas. Before adjourning, this memorable body made an effort to appease the outraged feelings of the Van Buren majority by adopting a resolution of fulsome praise of the distinguished Democrat. The resolution ended by declaring, "That we hereby tender to him, in

honorable retirement, the assurance of the deeply seated confidence, affection and respect of the American Democracy."

Tyler's fate. It is of interest to note that Tyler was ignored entirely, both in the resolutions and in the presentation of candidates. By arrangement another convention was held in Baltimore at the same time as the Democratic convention. This was in the interest of Tyler, and is said to have been made of both Democrats and Whigs, mostly office-holders. This convention unanimously nominated Tyler, who accepted the nomination. The complete disintegration of his support, and the inevitable ridicule accompanying his canvass, induced him to withdraw from the race in a long sarcastic letter. This ended the political fortunes of the first "accidental President.”

up

Result of the campaign. The campaign was fought by the parties upon similar lines to the preceding election. The Tyler disaffection had materially disturbed the unity of the Whigs. Their platform was brief and somewhat ambiguous. It attempted to keep before the public the questions which had been in the background of an unsuccessful party for years. The success of the Whigs had not been followed by the promised revival of industry. The new agitation of the Texas question had become acute in the nomination of Polk upon a reannexation platform. Besides, the Democrats were favored in presenting a candidate whose shield revealed no weak places from the fact that he had no political career. As the canvass proceeded Clay's anxiety over the Texas affair became great. He recognized it as the pivotal point. His anxiety induced him to commit the blunder of writing letters upon that sensitive point. He wrote to his friend, S. F. Miller of Alabama, "Personally, I could have no objection to the annexation of Texas, but I certainly should be unwilling to see the existing Union dissolved or seriously jeoparded for the sake of acquiring Texas." He further asserted that the leading and paramount object of his life was the preservation of the Union. Surely there was nothing in this to give offense to any Amer

ican unless it was the uncompromising Abolitionist, who saw nothing in Texas but slavery, which was too dear at any price. A second letter was written in which Mr. Clay freely said: "Far from having any personal objection to the annexation of Texas, I should be glad to see it, without dishonor, without war, with the common consent of the Union, and upon just and fair terms. I do not think that the subject of slavery should affect it one way or the other." This was the honest expression of a public man upon a great question. But its honesty was no defense. After this letter was made public, there was little hope for its author. Like that of Van Buren, it could not be explained. It added nothing to his candidacy in the South, and it weakened him materially in the North. New York would decide the contest. The Democrats wisely prevailed upon Silas Wright to accept the candidacy for governor in the Empire State. On this battle-ground the issue was decided. Here, where the Whigs had been successful against the party of Van Buren in the State contests, Clay was to meet his Waterloo. It is still a question of doubt how much his defeat was due to the Abolitionists, how much to the nativist movement, how much to the anti-rent movement, and how much to fraud. It is sufficient to say that any one of these elements was strong enough to defeat him, and it was strange that the fates decreed that all of them should be arrayed against him. He lost the State by five thousand and the country at large by thirty-eight thousand popular vote, which gave Polk a majority of sixty-five in the electoral college. This election was the first in which the "Dark Horse" candidate (more common in recent years) was triumphant. Polk had defeated the shrewd Van Buren in the Democratic convention on the troublesome Texas question, and now upon the same issue he accomplished the defeat of the most popular party leader since the days of Jefferson.

CHAPTER IX

THE DECADENCE OF POLITICAL ORGANIZATION—1844-1856

The nativist movement. The national delegate convention for the nomination of candidates for President and Vice-President was ere this time thoroughly established. No further detailed accounts of these gatherings are necessary, since there is much uniformity in their composition, their authority, and their proceedings. For the contest of 1848, the first convention that was held was that of the nativist movement. This party was a new factor in politics and had its rise through a form of antagonism to Catholics, due largely to the active participation in politics by the Irish Catholics in the cities, and especially in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. This confinement to the cities was due to the presence there of the greater number of immigrants than in the rural regions, notwithstanding many Irish immigrants had gone into rural communities. The hostility largely took on a racial color. In the Southern section the activity was largely confined to the lower strata of society. The climax in New York was a riot between Catholics and Protestants, after which a ticket was put in the field. The distinguished inventor, Samuel F. B. Morse, published letters in the Observer which purported to discover ulterior motives of the Catholic element. These letters aroused widespread distrust which was followed by anti-popery meetings. One such meeting in 1835 was broken up by Catholics and their sympathizers which caused an anti-Catholic ticket to be put into the field in the next election. This movement