for the purposes of the Courts of Common Pleas. Massachu setts proper was divided into three districts, the western, middle, and southern, which chose six, five, and four electors respectively. The District of Maine had also three districts, which chose three, three, and one, respectively. The Demo

crats hoped to get half the electors under this system, but they were grievously disappointed. Every district chose Federal electors. The total popular vote was 50,333 for Clinton electors, and 26,110 for Madison.

The electoral vote throughout the Union was much closer than was anticipated. The "solid South" was arrayed in favor of Madison; most of the North voted for Clinton. Vermont and Pennsylvania alone separated from their neighbors, and the vote of Pennsylvania decided the election. The electoral votes were as shown in the table on the opposite page.

The count of electoral votes, which took place on the 10th of February, 1813, in the Representatives' Hall, was marked by no incident worthy of notice. It was a proceeding in all respects similar to previous counts.

IX

THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA “DYNASTY ”

THE fate of the Federalist party is one of the most singular casualties in the history of politics. The party was destroyed by the success of its own principles in the hands of its opponents. The anti-Federalists began their existence by opposing the Constitution as destructive of the rights of the individual, and particularly of the smaller States; when in power, they drove the Federalists near to the point of advocating a dissolution of the Union by perpetuating the domination of Virginia over the "confederacy." During the administrations of Washington and Adams the Federalists were champions of national supremacy, as opposed to the "State Rights" doctrines expressed in the resolutions of 1798 and 1799; Jefferson's policy in acquiring Louisiana, and the attitude of the Democrats toward New England particularism during the war of 1812, went far beyond the Federalism of Hamilton. Finally, the demand for peace on any terms, and a cessation of the war, denounced by the Democrats as "moral treason," and held up for the execration of all patriots, was precisely the policy which Mr. Madison finally adopted; and the Treaty of Ghent did not even mention either of the objects for which war had been declared. Yet the party that had, as it were, led the way, was trampled in the dust by those who followed after. No doubt the gradual and unconscious adoption by the Democrats of the national principle which had been the original bond of union of the Federal party made it easy for Federalists to go over to the other side. But the disintegration of the organization did not take place until the conclusion of peace brought to an end the only issue that divided parties by a broad line.

The Hartford convention was, beyond a doubt, the event of Madison's second administration which had the most important influence upon the ensuing presidential election. Whether it should have been a death-blow to the Federal party is a ques

tion that requires a much fuller and more dispassionate discus sion than it has ever had at the hands of a historian of high standing. Writers have been prone to take the superficial view that, since there were New England Federalists of the greatest prominence in the party who expected and desired a dissolu tion of the Union, which is undoubtedly true, and since those men were among the projectors and promoters of the Hartford convention; and since certain phrases in the report of the convention refer to a dissolution as among the possibilities of the future, therefore the convention was a treasonable assembly, whose members favored the formation of a confederation of Northern States. The other view deserves careful consideration, namely, that conservatives obtained control of a movement which radicals designed to be directed to the destruction of the Union. George Cabot, the head of the Massachusetts delegation and the president of the convention, expressed his own opinion of the duty set before him when he replied to a young friend who asked him what was to be done at Hartford, "We are going to keep you young hotheads from getting into mischief." Pickering, who was a disunionist, was displeased with the choice of delegates; and John Lowell, who shared Pickering's dislike of the turn the movement took, opposed the convention because he did not believe it would recommend the "effectual measures" which he desired. A study of the proceedings and of the report of the convention, with a prejudice born of these facts, leads one to quite a different conclusion from that of the historians who express themselves on the subject in terms of unqualified abhorrence of the convention and of all who took part in it.

Whatever be the view one holds of this unique assemblage, one thing is certain. It was the most unpopular convention ever held in the country, both during its session and ever since. The commissioners of Massachusetts and Connecticut, appointed to urge at the national capital the measures it recommended, arrived at Washington just as intelligence was received of the battle of New Orleans. Less than a fortnight afterward came the joyful news that a peace treaty had been signed. Nothing remained for Mr. Otis and his associates to do; and they returned home quietly, but pursued by shouts of derision from the Democratic press. The possibility of a return of the Federalists to power ceased from that moment.

The new questions which arose, as soon as Congress was able

to turn from the perilous and perplexing foreign problems which had engaged its attention for many years, led ultimately to a new party division. At the outset they merely broke down the old lines. The incorporation of the second Bank of the United States was carried by a great majority in a Congress nearly two to one Democratic, and the act was approved by Madison. The position taken by the anti-Federalists in Washington's time, that such an act was unconstitutional, was completely abandoned. The war, with its necessary accompaniment of non-intercourse, cutting off the supply of foreign manufactured goods, had greatly stimulated domestic manufactures. The resumption of commerce after the Treaty of Ghent left the new industries exposed to violent foreign competition. The urgent calls for protection by means of higher tariff duties were responded to by the party in power, which thus adopted another of Hamilton's principles. The protection sentiment of that day had no more ardent supporter than John C. Calhoun. The question of internal improvements also began, at this time, to acquire prominence; but it was not until long afterward that it became a party issue, and ranged the Democratic party, following its original doctrine of "strict construction," in opposition to the policy.

The only extensive stronghold of the Federal party, New England, was endangered from within. A revolt against the ecclesiastical supremacy of the Congregational Church gave New Hampshire to the Democratic party; it left the Federalists but a meagre majority in Massachusetts; even in everfaithful Connecticut it unsettled the hold of the Federalists. Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury in the cabinets of Washington and Adams, became the candidate of the "toleration" party for Governor, nominated by the influence of the Episcopalians against his old Federal associates.

The presidential election drew near amid the general breaking-up of the Federal party. It had been understood between Mr. Madison and Mr. Monroe that the Secretary of State was to be brought forward for the succession with all the power of the administration. Yet it was not so easy as it might seem from a consideration merely of Mr. Monroe's apparent strength in the electoral colleges, second only to that of Washington, to bring about his nomination. He had two dangerous competitors. The Northern wing of the party, particularly the New York contingent, was earnestly in favor of Governor

Tompkins, of New York. Mr. Monroe was not a favorite even with the Southern members; and there was a great intrigue to bring forward William H. Crawford, of Georgia. The first step toward a nomination was the posting of an anonymous notice, dated March 10, 1816, inviting Republican senators and members of Congress to meet in the Representatives' Hall, on the 12th, "to take into consideration the propriety of nominating persons as candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States." Fifty-eight members attended this meeting, at which it was resolved to call a caucus for the 16th of the month, in the hope of a larger attendance. Of 141 Republican members, 119 attended the second caucus. The number was doubtless increased by the anxiety felt by the friends of the several candidates lest one or another should be nominated by a chance minority. The supporters of Mr. Monroe were out in force. The "National Intelligencer" manifested some trepidation lest the administration candidate should be defeated. "If ever doubted," it remarked, "the public opinion has been recently so decidedly expressed as to leave little doubt that the prominent candidate will, in the end, unite the suffrage of the whole Republican party." The "public opinion" in favor of the existing régime was as easily manufactured then as it is now, through the agency of the office-holders. The candidacy of Governor Tompkins was seen, even before the caucus was held, to be hopeless. He was known by but few of the persons who were to make the nomination. It is asserted in Hammond's "New York" that four fifths of the New York members preferred Crawford to Monroe. One of these members said that Martin Van Buren and Peter B. Porter, for reasons of their own, - but what their motives were is not known, prevented the delegation from going to Crawford; and thus they secured the nomination of Monroe.

Notwithstanding the inducements to attend the caucus, twenty-two Republicans were absent, of whom fifteen were known to be opposed to the caucus system of nomination. Immediately after an organization of the meeting was effected, Mr. Clay, and also Mr. John W. Taylor, of New York, moved resolutions that it is inexpedient to present candidates. The motions were rejected, it is not recorded by what majority. The vote for a candidate for President was then taken. It resulted in the nomination of Mr. Monroe by the narrow majority of eleven votes. Monroe had sixty-five votes, Crawford