For these reasons then, any adequate treatment of the campaign of 1832 necessitates considerable attention to much that occurred in the four years following Jackson's first election in November, 1828.

In this monograph the writer's aim has been to show the party development and the maneuvers which affected the course and outcome of the presidential campaign of 1832, and in this movement appears the first application of the nominating convention to political practice. So much has been written on the Jacksonian period that a new study requires justification, but the topics here emphasized have never been adequately treated.

So closely are the presidential campaigns of 1824, 1828 and 1832 connected by the two topics, the development of political parties and the early application of the nominating convention idea, that adequate treatment of the campaign of 1832 involves a study of the two immediately preceding it. It was this which makes necessary the brief summary of the campaigns of 1824 and 1828 contained in the first chapter. In this chapter and elsewhere I have pointed out, I believe for the first time, the significance of the first state nominating convention in Pennsylvania, the germ and precedent for its successor, the national nominating convention, and that the idea of the latter had been suggested as early as February, 1822. I have shown how Antimasonry came to inaugurate in American politics the use of the nominating convention. It has never before been clearly shown how entirely a one-man party the National Republican was in the campaign of 1832, and how hard pressed it was for a leading issue on which to oppose Jackson. I have endeavored to set forth in some detail the internal struggle for the succession in the Democratic party and the bearing of the resulting breach between Jackson and Calhoun on the campaign. In the same connection I have tried to correct the view that the Democratic convention of 1832 owed its origin solely to Jackson's determination to force Van Buren on the party as vice president. What actually took place in the three na

tional conventions-aside from the bare references to the nominees and the two-thirds rule-regarding their establishment of precedents, such as the unit rule, which are in use today, is a neglected subject on which I have tried to throw light. Some new light has also been thrown on the political tactics of the United States Bank. Further research has brought out clearly the political paradox of 1832, a situation where Antimasons and National Republicans were both doing their utmost against Jackson yet were unable to unite behind one candidate, though both parties were well aware that certain defeat awaited their failure to combine. I have also established as nearly as possible the way in which the party names "National Republican," "Democratic" and "Democratic Republican" were used during the campaigns of 1824, 1828 and 1832, and their status at the close of the latter contest. This topic has been placed in the appendix, as it suited the structure of the monograph better there than if attached to either the chapter on the Democrats or that on the National Republicans.

This study was undertaken at the suggestion of Professor John H. Latané, of the Johns Hopkins University, to whom, with Professor John M. Vincent, also of the Johns Hopkins University, I wish to express my sincere appreciation and hearty thanks for their helpful interest and advice. To Professor J. S. Bassett, of Smith College, I am also indebted for valuable suggestions. I desire to make special acknowledgment of the unfailing kindness and courtesy of those in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, and particularly of the valuable assistance rendered me by the Assistant-Chief, Mr. John C. Fitzpatrick, whose kindness in lending me the proof sheets of Van Buren's Autobiography prior to its publication so appreciably facilitated my work. Acknowledgment is also due to Mr. Charles Fickus, of the Maryland Historical Society Library, for his help in locating some useful Antimasonic pamphlets and periodicals.

S. R. G.

THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN OF 1832

CHAPTER I

PARTY REORGANIZATION, 1824-1828

James Monroe's second administration terminated the line of Revolutionary founders of the United States which had filled the presidency since the inception of that office. It likewise terminated the so-called "Virginia dynasty" which had uninterruptedly supplied the presidential material during the last twenty-four years. These two circumstances made possible the complete disintegration of the old Republican party which had come into power with the "Virginia dynasty" and was now to make a simultaneous exit.

The prime factor in the Republican party's long domination of national politics under direction of the Virginia line of presidents was the Virginia-New York alliance. This combination had been founded by Jefferson and indoctrinated with his political philosophy. Its power rested upon the political alliance of Virginia and New York, supported by certain States greatly under the influence of their example; namely, New Jersey in the North, and Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee and Georgia in the South. Under this combination, to Virginia went the presidential and to New York went the vice-presidential selection. The President's influence and preference exercised such weight in the designation of his successor that, immediately the latter was known, he was styled by his enemies "the heir apparent."1

1 Channing, History of the United States, 1789-1815, vol. iv, chap. vi; Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson, vol. i, pp. 323-324; cf. Henry Adams, History of the United States, 1801-1807, vol. ii, pp. 201-206.

VIMU

12

THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN OF 1832

Just prior to the opening of the campaign of 1824, the mainsprings of the Virginia-New York alliance were two organizations known as the Richmond Junto of Virginia and the Albany Regency of New York. Each of these political organizations dominated the politics of its particular State, and hence of the adjoining States in so far as the latter inclined to follow the political lead of Virginia or New York in a presidential contest. The Junto was the looser organization of the two, being composed of some dozen men of high character, political intelligence and prominent families, with no one individual predominating. The Junto's mouthpiece was the Richmond Enquirer, whose editor, Thomas Ritchie, was one of the members. The Regency had been born in the factional struggles of New York State politics between the followers of DeWitt Clinton and Martin Van Buren. By 1822 the latter faction under Van Buren's able leadership was completely victorious, and their leader the political master of the State. The Albany Regency was a consequence of this victory and comprised the faction's leaders in the State, all upright, able men, most of whom held office of some sort at Albany. Its mouthpiece was the Albany Argus, edited by one of its members, Edwin Croswell. So effective was this machine's centralized control that, excepting about two years, it dominated the State, and was a prominent factor in national politics for over twenty years.2

The Republican party's character had changed markedly during the quarter century in which it had dominated the country's politics. Its rival, the Federalist party, had died, attainted with disloyalty to the country in the War of 1812, so that since 1816 it had been unopposed by any political enemy, and had come to embrace a vast majority of the entire electorate. The disappearance of political opposition

2 Lynchburg Virginian, quoted in Richmond Enquirer, May 6, 1823; cf. Niles' Weekly Register, vol. xxvii, pp. 1-5, 17-21; for Regency, Thurlow Weed, Autobiography, p. 103; Jabez D. Hammond, History of Political Parties in New York, vol. ii, p. 157.