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
When Van Buren was defeated for re-election to the Presidency in
1840, his friends imitated the Jackson tactics of 1825 by at once
renominating him by mass-meetings and through Democratic newspapers as
the Democratic candidate for President in 1844, and a decided majority
of the delegates to the national convention were either instructed
for Van Buren or elected as his friends. Calhoun was favored by the
Democrats of South Carolina and Georgia, and ex-Vice-President Johnson
was an energetic candidate for the nomination, with General Cass, of
Michigan, as the man who was looked to as most likely to concentrate
the opposition to Van Buren. Van Buren was in the attitude before
the Democratic National Convention of 1844 that Seward was before
the Chicago Republican Convention of 1860. A decided majority of the
delegates desired his nomination, but many of them believed that
Clay would defeat him, and they were quite willing to reaffirm the
two-thirds rule, even against the earnest protest of Van Buren’s most
faithful leaders, because it was well known that he never could attain
the two-thirds vote of the convention.
Van Buren was regarded as a most accomplished and rather an
unscrupulous politician. He was certainly a brilliant political leader,
a very sagacious counsellor, and believed in shaping the policy of
the party chiefly or wholly with the view of success; but a short
time before the meeting of the national convention he made one of the
boldest political deliverances of his life against the annexation of
Texas, and he did it with the knowledge that the Democrats of the South
were practically united in the support of annexation, with a very
large proportion of the Northern Democrats in harmony with it. In the
month of May letters were given to the public from both Van Buren and
Clay, opposing the annexation of Texas at that time as inexpedient,
because it would mean war with Mexico, unless annexed with the consent
of that nation. Clay’s letter did not strengthen him in the South, but
certainly strengthened him in the North, and should have prevented the
Abolition vote in New York from sacrificing Clay and electing an ardent
supporter of the annexation of Texas with its slave Constitution, and
under a treaty that permitted its subdivision into four new States,
each of which would increase the slave power in the Senate.
Van Buren’s letter was made public just about one month before the
meeting of the Democratic National Convention, and it was severely
criticised by Southern newspapers and Democratic leaders generally,
and with great severity by those who desired his defeat. The Richmond
_Enquirer_, then one of the ablest and most influential of the
Democratic organs of the country, edited by Mr. Ritchie, demanded that
the instructions which had been given to the Virginia delegates to
support Van Buren should be rescinded. In some instances delegates did
disobey Van Buren instructions and others resigned rather than support
him.
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