United States presidential election, 1844
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The United States presidential election of 1844 saw Democrat James Knox Polk defeat Whig Henry Clay in a close contest that turned on foreign policy, with Polk favoring the annexation of Texas and Clay opposed.
Democratic nominee James K. Polk ran on a platform that embraced American territorial expansionism, an idea soon to be called Manifest Destiny. At their convention, the Democrats called for the annexation of Texas and asserted that the United States had a “clear and unquestionable” claim to “the whole” of Oregon. By informally tying the Oregon boundary dispute to the more controversial Texas debate, the Democrats appealed to both Northern expansionists (who were more adamant about the Oregon boundary) and Southern expansionists (who were more focused on annexing Texas as a slave state). Polk went on to win a narrow victory over Whig candidate Henry Clay, in part because Clay had taken a stand against expansion, although economic issues were also of great importance. (The slogan “Fifty-four Forty or Fight!” is often incorrectly associated with this election; it first appeared in 1845.)
This was the last presidential election to be held on different days in different states, as starting with the presidential election of 1848 all states held the election on the same date in November.
Contents |
[edit] Background
The incumbent President in 1844 was John Tyler, who had ascended to the office of President upon the death of William Henry Harrison. Although Tyler had been nominated on a Whig ticket, his policies had alienated the Whigs and they actually kicked him out of the party on September 13, 1841. Without a home in either of the two major parties, Tyler sought an issue that could create a viable third party to support his bid for the presidency in 1844.
Tyler found that issue in the annexation of Texas. When Texas had achieved its independence in 1836, it had initially sought to be annexed by the United States. Opposition from the northern states had prevented the United States from acting favorably on this request, and so in 1838 Texas withdrew its request. There the issue lay until 1843, when Tyler and his newly minted Secretary of State, Abel P. Upshur, took the issue up again and started negotiations on annexation. When Upshur was killed in an accident on February 28, 1844, the treaty was almost complete. Tyler appointed John C. Calhoun Secretary of State as Upshur's replacement, and Calhoun completed the treaty, presenting it to the Senate on April 22. However, Calhoun had also sent a letter to British Minister Richard Pakenham which charged the British with attempting to coerce Texas into abolishing slavery and which justified the annexation as a defensive move to preserve southern slavery, and Calhoun presented the letter to Senate as well. Thus, going into the presidential campaign season, Texas annexation explicitly tied to southern slavery had suddenly emerged as the top issue.
The two front runners for the nominations were Henry Clay for the Whigs and Martin Van Buren for the Democrats. Both tried to straddle the issue by making statements opposing the immediate annexation of Texas without the consent of Mexico.
[edit] Nominations
[edit] Whig Party nomination
The Whigs held their convention on May 1. Clay, the party's greatest congressional leader, was chosen on the first ballot despite his having lost two prior presidential elections: in 1824 to John Quincy Adams as a Democrat-Republican, then in 1832 to Andrew Jackson as a National Republican. Theodore Frelinghuysen was nominated as Clay's running mate.
[edit] Democratic Party nomination
The Democrats met in Baltimore on May 27.
While Van Buren held a slim majority of delegates, his public stand against immediate annexation had increased the hostility of the opposition. Early in the convention, the delegates drew up rules for approving the platform and the candidate. At the instigation of Robert J. Walker of Mississippi, the convention re-established the rule that a Democratic candidate must receive a 2/3 supermajority of delegates to receive the nomination. (Ironically, this rule had first been used in 1832 to secure the nomination of Van Buren to the Vice Presidency over John C. Calhoun.) This fatally wounded Van Buren's candidacy; as it became clear that too many delegates were hostile to Van Buren for him to ever receive the necessary vote, his support collapsed.
Finally, on the eighth ballot, a new name was introduced: James K. Polk. While he did not receive the necessary votes to win on this ballot, the momentum was clearly in his direction, and he won the necessary 2/3 on the following ballot, making Polk the first “dark horse” candidate.
The Democrats chose Silas Wright as Polk's running mate, but Wright refused the nomination. George Mifflin Dallas, who had finished a close second to Wright in the balloting, was then offered a spot on the ticket, and he accepted.
When advised of his nomination via letter, Polk replied: “It has been well observed that the office of President of the United States should neither be sought nor declined. I have never sought it, nor should I feel at liberty to decline it, if conferred upon me by the voluntary suffrages of my fellow citizens.”
[edit] National Democratic Tyler Convention
The National Democratic Tyler Convention assembled in Baltimore on May 27 and May 28, the same time as the Democratic National Convention. It nominated Tyler for a second term but did not recommend a choice for Vice President. It is possible that the convention hoped to influence the DNC.[1] Tyler was at first enthusiastic about his chances and accepted their nomination; his address was referenced in the New Hampshire Patriot and State Gazette on June 6, but the paper did not print the text of Tyler's letter.
[edit] Other nominations
Another candidate in the 1844 campaign was Joseph Smith, Jr., founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who intended to run with Sidney Rigdon as his running mate. The effort was aborted when Smith was murdered on June 27, 1844.
James Birney ran as the anti-slavery Liberty Party candidate, garnering 2.3% of the votes (a fair amount for a third-party candidate), but no electoral votes. The votes he won were more than the difference in votes between Henry Clay and James Polk; since most of votes came from voters who would have voted for Clay, it is thought that he swung the election in favor of Polk. (see below)
[edit] General election
[edit] Campaign
[edit] Tyler drops out
Tyler spent much of the summer with his new bride and their honeymoon in New York City. While there, he discovered that his support was quite soft. He also received appeals from Democrats to withdraw, “including a respectful coazing letter from Andrew Jackson”.[2] Tyler wrote a letter in which he withdrew from the race around August 25; it was announced in several newspapers on August 29, including the New Hampshire Patriot and State Gazette, the Berkshire County Whig, and the Barre Gazette. The New Hampshire Patriot and State Gazette stated that Tyler withdrew for fear that his candidacy would divide the votes going to Polk, and potentially lead to the election of Clay.
[edit] Clay and Polk
The Whigs initially played on Polk's comparative obscurity, asking “Who is James K. Polk?” as part of their campaign to get Clay elected.
Polk was committed to territorial expansion and favored the annexation of Texas. To deflect charges of pro-slavery bias in the Texas annexation issue, Polk combined the Texas annexation issue with a demand for the acquisition of the entire Oregon Territory, which was at the time jointly administered by the United States and Great Britain. This proved to be an immensely popular message, especially compared to the Whigs' economic program. It even forced Clay to move on the issue of Texas annexation, saying that he would support annexation after all if it could be accomplished without war and upon “just and fair” terms.
[edit] Results
The election was very close run. The Liberty Party may well have played the role of spoiler: in New York state, Birney received 15,800 votes, while Clay lost New York by a mere 5,100 votes, and if New York had been won by Clay he would have won the Electoral College 141–134. It is probable that many of Birney's supporters would have voted for Clay, but it is impossible to determine if enough would have voted for Clay to have overturned the results of the election.
| Presidential Candidate | Party | Home State | Popular Vote(a) | Electoral Vote | Running Mate | Running Mate's Home State |
Running Mate's Electoral Vote |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count | Percentage | |||||||
| James K. Polk | Democratic | Tennessee | 1,339,494 | 49.5% | 170 | George Mifflin Dallas | Pennsylvania | 170 |
| Henry Clay | Whig | Kentucky | 1,300,004 | 48.1% | 105 | Theodore Frelinghuysen | New York[3] | 105 |
| James G. Birney | Liberty | New York | 62,103 | 2.3% | 0 | Thomas Morris | Ohio | 0 |
| Other | 2,058 | 0.1% | 0 | Other | 0 | |||
| Total | 2,703,659 | 100.0% | 275 | Total | 275 | |||
| Needed to win | 138 | Needed to win | 138 | |||||
Source (Popular Vote): Leip, David. 1844 Presidential Election Results. Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections (July 27, 2005).
Source (Electoral Vote): Electoral College Box Scores 1789–1996. Official website of the National Archives. (July 31, 2005).
(a) The popular vote figures exclude South Carolina where the Electors were chosen by the state legislature rather than by popular vote.
[edit] Electoral college selection
| Method of choosing Electors | State(s) |
|---|---|
| each Elector appointed by state legislature | South Carolina |
| each Elector chosen by voters statewide | (all other states) |
[edit] Consequences
Polk's election confirmed the American public's desire for westward expansion. The annexation of Texas was formalized on March 1, 1845 before Polk even took office. As feared, Mexico refused to accept the annexation and the Mexican-American War broke out in 1846. Meanwhile, the United States and Great Britain negotiated the Buchanan-Pakenham Treaty, which divided up the Oregon Territory between the two countries.
[edit] See also
[edit] Notes
- ^ Hinshaw, Seth B. (2000). Ohio Elects the President. Mansfield, Ohio: Book Masters, 27.
- ^ Wilentz, 573.
- ^ Frelinghuysen's home state was apparently New York in 1844. See The Journal of the Senate for February 12, 1845. Also note that Frelinghuysen was President of New York University in 1844. There is some contradictory evidence in favor of a New Jersey residency: the National Archives gives his home state as New Jersey and the Journal of the Senate notes that Vermont's electors believed Frelinghuysen to be a New Jersey resident. Frelinghuysen was a New Jersey native and his political career had largely been conducted in New Jersey.
[edit] References
- Books
- Blum, John M.; et al. (1963). The National Experience: A History of the United States. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. ISBN 0-15-500366-6.
- Chitwood, Oliver Perry (1939). John Tyler, Champion of the Old South.
- Harris, J. George (1990). in Wayne Cutler (ed.): Polk's Campaign Biography. University of Tennessee Press.
- Holt, Michael F. (1999). The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party: Jacksonian Politics and the Onset of the Civil War. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-505544-6.
- McCormac, Eugene I. (1922). James K. Polk: A Political Biography.
- Paul, James C. N. (1951). Rift in the Democracy.
- Remini, Robert V. (1991). Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union.
- Sellers, Charles Grier, Jr. (1966). James K. Polk, Continentalist, 1843–1846, vol 2 of biography.
- Wilentz, Sean (2005). "Divided Democrats and the Election of 1844", The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, 1st ed., New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 566–575. ISBN 0-393-32921-6.
- Web sites
- A Historical Analysis of the Electoral College. The Green Papers. Retrieved on September 17, 2005.
- Ohio History Central. Ohio History Central Online Encyclopedia. Retrieved on November 8, 2006.
[edit] External links
[edit] Navigation
| United States Presidential Elections |
|---|
| 1789 • 1792 • 1796 • 1800 • 1804 • 1808 • 1812 • 1816 • 1820 • 1824 • 1828 • 1832 • 1836 • 1840 • 1844 • 1848 • 1852 • 1856 • 1860 • 1864 • 1868 • 1872 • 1876 • 1880 • 1884 • 1888 • 1892 • 1896 • 1900 • 1904 • 1908 • 1912 • 1916 • 1920 • 1924 • 1928 • 1932 • 1936 • 1940 • 1944 • 1948 • 1952 • 1956 • 1960 • 1964 • 1968 • 1972 • 1976 • 1980 • 1984 • 1988 • 1992 • 1996 • 2000 • 2004 • 2008 See also: House • Senate • Governors |
