Instead, a bill to renew the bank's charter was passed, which the President vetoed July 10, 1832. The fall elections showed that the people were with the President. In the spring of 1833 Jackson instructed his Secretary of the Treasury to direct that no more government money should be deposited in the bank. The Secretary refused, and off went his official head. Roger B. Taney was appointed, and the President's order was obeyed. This has been designated as a “removal of the deposits "; but in point of fact there was no removal; merely a cessation of making any further deposits, and leaving the government balance in the bank to be withdrawn to pay current expenses as they should arise. It is scarcely fair to claim that Jackson's judgment was vindicated by the subsequent history of the bank, but that history is entirely suggestive. Failing to get a renewal of its charter from the Federal Government, the bank applied to and was granted a charter by the Pennsylvania Legislature in 1836. In 1837 it suspended; then resumed for a short time; and closed finally in 1839, having sunk its entire capital.

Calhoun and Jackson had quarrelled; and in 1833 Calhoun's forces, united with the already Anti-Jackson men in the Senate, gave a majority. A vote of censure of the President for his action towards the bank was passed. Clay, Calhoun, Webster, Frelinghuysen, and Preston were some of the giants arrayed against the President. Unfaltering in his reliance upon the support of the people, he would have stood alone, unwavering and undismayed. But a valiant cohort in the Senate rallied around him Benton, Forsyth of Georgia, King of Alabama, Rives of Virginia, Silas Wright, were some of them. An artificial panic was started by the brokers and agents of the bank and hostile politicians to frighten Jackson into a reversal of his policy.

stood unmoved amidst the storm.

But like a rock he

The resolution of

L

censure was passed by a vote of 26 to 20.

The President

sent a protest against this action, which the Senate declared was a breach of privilege, and talked of impeachment. So the fight went on. The House-the immediate representatives of the people-tabled the resolution of censure. Benton, with his characteristic earnestness, ability, and persistency, determined that the resolution of censure ought to be, and should be, expunged from the Journal of the Senate. From time to time he introduced several resolutions on the subject. In the meantime, the State legislatures were acting, instructing their Senators, and superseding those who were fixed in their hostility. Finally, on January 14, 1837, by a vote of 24 to 19 the resolution was ordered to be expunged; and it was done in the presence of the Senate and crowded galleries, amidst intense but suppressed excitement.

It was not until 1843, long after Jackson had retired to the Hermitage, that a further vindication of his course. was enacted by Congress. While in command at New Orleans he had suspended the writ of habeas corpus; and for refusing to obey such writ he was fined $1000 by Judge Hall. Jackson promptly paid the fine, but under protest, refusing to let friends pay it for him. After the passions of party had waned by his withdrawal from public life, this fine, with interest, was refunded by a vote of Congress.

IT

1828-1852

T is impossible for all men to think alike, if they think at all. This is especially true in republics, where thought is untrammelled, and where every citizen, having a share in the responsibility of government, is in duty bound to form an opinion as to what is demanded for the best interests of the country, and to ally himself with those holding similar views. The Federal party having died a somewhat lingering death, such of its old adherents who could not, or would not, join the Democrats, united with all who, for any reason, were opposed to the dominant party, and formed the Whig party. The new party, starting with the prestige and patronage of the Chief Executive, fought many battles, and suffered many defeats before it became extinct.

For several years a feeling of hostility to what was later called the slave power had been growing in some of the Northern States. This feeling was nurtured, not only by those who had strong convictions upon the abstract question, but also by those who were seeking ground to weaken, divide, and destroy the Democratic party. There was a long and bitter fight over the admission of Missouri as a State, recognizing slavery in its

50

constitution. The immediate issue was settled by a compromise, but the question remained to rankle, and ultimately to produce a fearful and bloody conflict.

In 1828 the Legislature of Tennessee placed Andrew Jackson in nomination for the Presidency. Several other State legislatures expressed a preference for Jackson. He entered the field as the Democratic candidate. His successful competitor of four years before, John Quincy Adams, was pitted against him, as the National Republican, or, more properly, the Whig, candidate. In the Congress of that day the members were classified as Democrats and Whigs. The result was a sweeping victory for Jackson, he having received 178 electoral votes, while Adams had but 83. The popular vote stood:

Jackson and Calhoun.
Adams and Rush

647,231
509,597

In the contest of 1824, for the first time, there had been record made of the popular vote. And it was necessarily imperfect, for the reason that the electoral vote in eight of the thirty-four States was cast by their respective legislatures.

Coming back to the more consecutive order of events, 1832 witnessed the inauguration of a radical and important change in the method of selecting candidates. Delegates were chosen by the people to meet in national convention, and nominate the candidates to represent and be supported by the party sending such delegates. These conventions soon took to themselves the authority to promulgate a party platform, or declaration of the political principles and policy to which their candidates and their party stood pledged. National conventions, for the purposes indicated, became a recognized institution of the country from that year forward, and their action was generally accepted as having the binding force of statute law. As a rule, the platforms have been received with.

as ready acceptance, within their limits, as the Thirtynine Articles, or the Westminster Catechism. Loyalty to party has been demanded, as but little, if at all, less obligatory than allegiance to the government.

The first National convention was held in Philadelphia in September, 1830, for the purpose of organizing the Anti-Masonic party. It was based upon one idea, and that a narrow one; and hence its existence was ephemeral. One William Morgan, a citizen of Western New York, had disappeared mysteriously in 1826. It was alleged that he had been abducted by the Freemasons because he had revealed the secrets of the association. Constant agitation had aroused a bitter feeling in some localities, and an effort was made to magnify this into a national issue, by denouncing secret orders as hostile and dangerous to republican institutions. At the preliminary convention referred to, there were delegates from ten of the twenty-four States and from the then Territory of Michigan. The second, or first formal, convention of the Anti-Masons was held in Baltimore on September 26, 1831. Thirteen States were represented. William Wirt, of Maryland, was nominated for President, and Amos Ellmaker, of Pennsylvania, for Vice-President.

The National Republican, or Whig, convention met in Baltimore on December 12, 1831, with delegates from seventeen States. The change of name was not yet fully effected, but the identity of the party could not be mistaken. Henry Clay was nominated for President, and John Sergeant of Pennsylvania for Vice-President.

Neither the Democrats, the Anti-Masons, nor the Whigs adopted any platform. But, at a ratification meeting held by the Whigs in Washington on May 11, 1832, in which many of the States were represented, resolutions were passed in favor of " adequate protection to American industry" as it then existed, in favor of “a