Our Presidents and how we make themMcClure, Alexander K. (Alexander Kelly)
History
Our Presidents and how we make them
McClure, Alexander K. (Alexander Kelly)
Presidents -- United States -- Election
The Whig National Convention was called to meet at Harrisburg on the
4th of December, 1839, just one year before the Presidential election,
and no national convention in the history of our politics ever moved
with such extreme caution. It was three days after the convention was
organized before a ballot was reached for President, the whole time
having been occupied in formal conferences of committees appointed by
each delegation to confer in the frankest way as to the best ticket to
unite the incongruous opposition elements. Clay had made exhaustive
effort to unite the opposition, even if necessary to sacrifice himself.
On repeated occasions he publicly declared that his name should not be
entertained if it was in any degree an obstacle to success, and in a
Buffalo address delivered some time before the convention met, he said:
“If my name creates any obstacle to union and harmony, away with it,
and concentrate upon some individual more acceptable to all branches of
the office.”
A Union Pennsylvania convention had been held in Harrisburg in
September, embracing representatives of the old National Republicans,
anti-Masons, and Whigs. It was largely planned and carried out by
Thaddeus Stevens, whose violent anti-Masonic convictions made him
the opponent of Clay, and that convention, while highly complimenting
Clay, declared that General Harrison was the most available of all the
candidates named for President. Governor Barbour, of Virginia, presided
over the national convention, and instead of proceeding to ballot for
candidates, the convention, after careful consideration, decided that
the delegations from the different States should confer with each
other, through sub-committees, and if possible reach a conclusion as to
the best nomination and report to the convention.
While there is no official record of the action of these committees,
it is known that at the start more favored Clay than any of the two
other candidates, as one of the known facts relating to their action
gave Clay 103 votes to 94 for Harrison and 57 for Scott. This vote is
based on the assumption that the entire delegation of each State would
vote in harmony with its committee, as the resolution under which the
committees were appointed provided that “each State represented shall
vote its full electoral vote by such delegation in the committee.”
After three days of conference, the joint committees reported to the
convention that they had decided in favor of Harrison by a vote of 148
to 90 for Clay and 16 for Scott.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account