Page images
PDF
EPUB

The inauguration on the Fourth of March, 1841, was a great occasion for the Whigs. They flocked to Washington in large numbers, many of them, alas! attracted thither by the hope of offices to be distributed by the new President to his party friends. There was an imposing procession of volunteer militia to escort General Harrison to the Capitol. The Presidentelect had himself arrived at the seat of government on the last day of February, apparently in the enjoyment of perfect health. He rode upon a white charger, flanked on either side by a bodyguard of personal friends. The ceremony, which was witnessed by a vast concourse of people, was preceded by the inauguration of Mr. Tyler as Vice-President, in the Senate Chamber. After the long line of official and non-official witnesses had come from the building to the eastern portico, General Harrison rose and delivered his inaugural address, save the last paragraph. Then the oath of office was administered by Chief Justice Taney, and the President pronounced the closing sentences of his address. While the cheers of the victorious Whigs were still rising, he retired, entered his private carriage, and drove to the White House.

XVII

THE FIRST "DARK HORSE"

-

No election ever caused more disappointment, both to victors and to vanquished, than that of 1840. It would be difficult to describe the feelings of the Democrats. They were puzzled, they were grieved, they were angry. They honestly did not believe the Whigs capable of governing the country. It was almost too great a strain upon their trust in the fitness of the people for self-government that confidence had been withdrawn from them. As for the conduct of the campaign in which they were defeated, with its claptrap of processions, songs, emblems, and slang, words failed to express their disgust. They declared that the victory had been won by fraud, by the momentary madness of the people, by the power of money, the first but not the last complaint of the sort, by anything and everything except the excellent influences that had always carried elections for the Democrats. However much they might differ among themselves, and even with themselves, as to the cause of the defeat, upon one thing they were resolved, that they would bring Van Buren forward again and elect him. The canvass of 1844 began, therefore, before Harrison was inaugurated. A St. Louis paper, almost as soon as the result of the election was known, placed Van Buren's name at the head of its columns as candidate for 1844, and "nailed its colors to the mast." Senator Benton thereupon wrote a letter to the editor commending his course, saying that twice before the Democratic party had won a victory, after its only two national defeats, by adopting at once the candidate in whose person it had suffered a reverse. This was the general sentiment of the party. In the three years ensuing, as the Washington "Globe" asserted just before the convention of 1844, twenty-four of the twenty-six States, in their state Democratic conventions, pronounced in favor of Van Buren, and more than three fourths of the conventions instructed their delegates to Baltimore to support him.

The disappointment of the Whigs was of a different character. It lay in the "Tyler too" part of their election programme. One month after General Harrison took the oath of office he died, and John Tyler became President. Congress was summoned in extraordinary session on the 31st of May, 1841. Among the first subjects to which the attention of Congress was called by the President was the question what should be substituted for the sub-treasury system, a financial device which had certainly been condemned by the popular voice in the recent elections. The Whigs took this to mean also the creation of a bank. Mr. Tyler held a different view. His course in Congress had never been favorable to the Bank of the United States. The Whig leaders supposed that Mr. Tyler had given them an assurance that he was in favor of a bank erected on a proper basis. Mr. Tyler did not admit that he had done so. The truth of the matter will never be known. When a bill creating a bank, which the Whigs supposed to have been drawn in accordance with his views, was presented to him for approval he vetoed it, and the Whig majority was not strong enough to pass it over the veto. A second bill was prepared, after a conference with the President, submitted to him after it was drafted and approved, and then passed without the alteration of a word. The President vetoed that bill also, possibly in a fit of natural anger at a letter written by John M. Botts, a leading Whig member from Virginia, its publication was a breach of confidence, in which Mr. Botts spoke with contempt of Mr. Tyler's "turns and twists,"

It is needless to say that this act was received with uncontrollable indignation by the Whigs throughout the country. All the members of the cabinet resigned, except Mr. Webster, the Secretary of State, who retained office for reasons which were approved by many of the Whigs. A caucus of members of the Senate and House of Representatives adopted an address in which they announced that all political alliance between them and John Tyler was at an end, and that henceforth those who brought the President into power can no longer, in any manner or degree, be justly held responsible or blamed for the administration of the executive branch of the government." It is matter of history that Mr. Tyler continued to the end of his term to be what his early acts as President had indicated that he would be. In fact his course was what his whole political life had indicated that it would

be. He relied throughout upon those who had opposed him, and thwarted the measures of those who had elected him. The only inconsistency of which he was guilty was in supposing, honestly no doubt, that he was "a firm and decided Whig," when he was opposed to a bank, opposed to a protective tariff, cpposed to the distribution of the proceeds of the public lands, opposed to internal improvements, and devoted to the principle of "strict construction" of the Constitution. The Whigs had not, to be sure, formally professed different principles from his in resolutions adopted by a national convention; but they were really unanimous, or substantially so, in holding all the views from which he dissented.

Whatever part an ambition to be reëlected, not by the Whigs, but by the Democrats, had in determining Mr. Tyler's course, he did not gain new political friends when he lost old ones. The Democrats were glad enough that the fruits of victory were snatched away from the Whigs; but, though they took advantage of the opportunity which chance threw in their way, they made no pretence of taking the President up as their own man. They loved the sin, but hated the sinner. There were some Democrats and Democratic papers slightly tinctured with "Tylerism," but they were few and uninfluential. By far the largest number of the Democrats were zealous and unwavering in their adherence to the fortunes of Mr. Van Buren. Yet it was not their unanimous sentiment. South Carolina was in favor of Mr. Calhoun, and so was Georgia; and that gentleman carried his sense of propriety so far that, in the autumn of 1843, he declined an invitation to visit Ohio in a semi-public way, on the ground that he ought not to do so while his name was before the country as a candidate for its highest office. Colonel R. M. Johnson, then lately Vice-President, was also advocated by the antiBenton men of Missouri, as well as by partisans in his own State of Kentucky. He had no such scruples as those which restrained Mr. Calhoun, for he made a tour through the North, as far as Boston, in the course of which, if he was not belied, he assured the people that nothing could prevent the election of Mr. Clay in 1844 but his own candidacy. His belief in himself is shown by a letter written early in January, 1844, wherein he said that he had worn a certain "red vest "when called upon to respond to my third unanimous nomination for the presidency by the annual convention of my

[ocr errors]

native State." His friends always spoke of him as "the old hero" and "old Tecumseh." His willingness to be before the people was further exemplified in a letter, written in answer to an inquiry, in which he said plainly that he would accept the second place on the ticket if he did not get the first. The claims of General Lewis Cass were urged by some of those who did not think the nomination of Mr. Van Buren advisable. Finally, in Pennsylvania, Mr. James Buchanan was brought forward as a "favorite son."

In point of fact, while a most decided preference was shown for Mr. Van Buren before any and all others, those who opposed him were bitter and determined. They declared that he could not be elected, and that it would be suicide for the party to nominate him. When the question of a convention was under discussion, South Carolina refused to send delegates; and hot discussions arose in the Democratic newspapers whether delegates should be chosen by districts or by general ticket, and whether Virginia, which was for Van Buren, should be allowed to enter the convention with her delegation numbering five times the votes she would be allowed to cast.

Such was the situation late in 1843. The Democrats

[ocr errors]

seemed to be, and were, in hopeless discord. The Whigs counted upon an easy victory, for they were absolutely united in supporting Mr. Clay, while the alleged treachery of Mr. Tyler had given them what was better than unanimity in respect of a candidate, political union. The next succeeding events seemed to work in their favor, for they were as confident of their ability to defeat Mr. Van Buren as were that gentleman's enemies in his own party that he could not be elected. Mr. Buchanan formally withdrew his name in December, 1843; and in the following month Mr. Calhoun published a letter which was at first taken as a withdrawal, but was afterwards seen to be only a refusal to allow his name to go before the convention. His friends were thus left free to give him their independent support if they would. Meanwhile many state conventions were instructing their delegates to vote for Mr. Van Buren, and his nomination seemed to be inevitable. A clear majority of all the delegates could be counted for him beyond a question, and it was not doubted that he would receive the necessary two thirds.

But the situation was changed as if by magic. The question of the annexation of Texas loomed up suddenly. An

« PreviousContinue »