USA > Alabama > The formative period in Alabama, 1815-1828 > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14
This power seems to have been more limited than would be imagined. There were no parties, nor even any standing is- sues. The people, busy with their clearings and their crops, appear to have elected their more ambitious neighbors to go up to the legislature and relieve them of anxiety about all politi- cal questions excepting only such as concerned immediate economic interests. No serious attempt was made to arouse them until Pickens seized upon the bank question and made an issue of it.
The relation existing between the champion of the State Bank and the Crawford men is not easy to trace. It is stated that Pickens, then a Congressman from North Carolina, sup- ported Crawford when he stood for the Presidency against Monroe in 1816. But when Crawford refused him the ap- pointment as register of the land office at Cahawba, which place had been promised him by Dallas, Pickens turned against the Georgia men and threatened to become the head of an opposition.+ It was probably Tait who secured for him the appointment as register of the land office at St. Stephens,5 and this seems to have prevented hostilities until the guber- natorial campaign of 1821, when Pickens denied all connection with the Crawford party."
It has been mentioned that Crawford stood for the aristo- cratic group in Georgia and that the majority of his followers who came to Alabama were planters of some means. The connection of a few of them with the unfortunate Huntsville bank made it possible for their enemies to call them "oppres- sors of the poor," and the fight for the State Bank was made a fight against the Georgia faction. The challenge was ac-
3 Mobile Argus, March 3, 1823, letter copied from the Franklin Ga- zette.
4 Hall Papers, Jack F. Ross to Bolling Hall, Aug. 25, 1821; Tait Pa- pers, William H. Crawford to C. Tait. Nov. 27, 1819.
5 Tait Papers, Wm. H. Crawford to C. Tait, Nov. 29, 1819.
" Bibb Papers, C. Tait to W. W. Bibb, Nov. 28, 1820.
105
POLITICS AND THE ELECTION OF 1824
cepted, and the Crawford men led the defense of the private banks, while their opponents combined against them to es- tablish the "people's bank."?
It is an interesting alignment of factions that was brought about by this situation. Farmers on a small scale had come into Alabama primarily from Tennessee, Georgia, and South Carolina; but whatever their origin, they were preponderant- ly Jackson men. Among the planters there was no such unan- imity. Those from Georgia were most numerous along the upper Alabama River, and they were the principal supporters of Crawford. Those from the Carolinas and Virginia pre- dominated in the Tombigbee basin as far up as Tuscaloosa, and Adams was strongest in this section. In the Tennessee Valley, the Georgia planters mingled with the planters from Virginia and the Carolinas and produced a variety of political sentiments, the Georgia influence being strong in Madison County but dwindling away toward the west. On the bank question, the Adams planters were allied with the Jackson farmers to defeat the Crawford men.8
The election of Pickens was the beginning of hard times for the Georgia faction. They had at first made Alabama their own, and the new State was glad to have their powerful in- fluence in Washington. Their monopoly of the Federal pat- ronage raised up enemies among the politicians from other states. In the untimely death of Governor Bibb, they lost a strong leader. This misfortune was followed in 1823 by the death of Senator John W. Walker. These two men had won much respect in the community, and there were no others of equal caliber to take their places. In the contest to fill the va- cant seat in the Senate, the Crawford men supported John McKinley, while their opponents, the "friends of the people," backed William Kelly. The latter won the contest by a narrow majority, and when the unexpired term was completed, he stood for re-election, being opposed this time by Dr. Henry Chambers. Chambers won the race and thereby restored the balance, for William R. King, who, like Pickens, was from North Carolina and no friend of the Georgia faction, retained
7 Alabama Republican, March 25, 1824; Huntsville Democrat, Nov. 11, 1823, July 20, 1824.
S The origin of the population in different sections of the State has been discussed in Chapter III. The statement of the political tendencies of the various sections is based upon the attitude of the press and the presidential vote of 1824.
106
THE FORMATIVE PERIOD IN ALABAMA
his seat continuously in the Senate for twenty-five years after Alabama became a State.9
But the Crawford men, while able to maintain a condition of political balance in the legislature, were not nearly so strong when elections went straight to the people. None of the early Congressmen were of their number, nor were they able to elect a governor after 1819. It is indeed surprising to consider how small was the group of men who all but dom- inated the legislature of the State. The planters were but few compared to the total number of settlers, nor did the Georgians constitute a majority of the planters, yet they made up the predominant class in an important section of the State and found their way into politics in relatively large numbers. This was possible because of their prominence as office-hold- ers; because there were no organized parties; and because there was no standing antagonism between the planter and the farmer. There were politicians who wanted to teach the peo- ple to know their rights. and in the matter of the Bank, they succeeded in their aim. But ordinarily the people did not feel a great need of instruction. In the absence of parties, poli- tics were largely personal. Only men of some station thought of running for office, and the lesser sort selected their favor- ite and voted for him without asking many questions as to his creed. While a study of the popular elections shows very clearly that the people knew what they wanted when a matter of political interest was put squarely before them, a compari- son of the votes of the legislature indicates that popular con- trol was, under ordinary circumstances, very slight.
Until the campaign of 1824 approached, local matters tend- ed to push national issues into the background. and the reason was that there was a nearly unanimous agreement upon all Federal questions excepting as to who should be President af- ter Monroe. Clay had a few strong friends in Alabama, but his advocacy of the tariff rendered him unpopular; and Craw- ford had no followers excepting the Georgia planters. The plain people were devotedly attached to Andrew Jackson, while Adams had strong support among the Carolina and Vir- ginia planters. New Englanders were generally disliked in this section of the country and the popularity of Adams indi-
- " Cobaich . Press, Dec. 14. 1822: Huntsville Democrat. July 20, 1824, Dec. 14. 1824. Dec. 21, 1824: Alabama Republican Dec. 17, 1824; Tait Parar's, Wm. H. Crawford to C. Tait, Feb. 16, 1823; Hall Papers. Aug. 21, 1823.
107
POLITICS AND THE ELECTION OF 1824
cates that the conservative element entertained a strong prej- udice against the aggressive democracy of the Jackson men. The support which Adams gave to the cause of internal im- provements was an asset in a state where improvements were badly needed, and his friends claimed that he was safer on the question of the tariff than any of the other candidates.10
The tariff question was the disturbing one. Alabama was a unit in condemning the system of protection, and the sup- porters of Jackson found their greatest difficulty here. The hero of New Orleans voted for the increased duties that were established in 1824, and this fact was used against him by his enemies, nor could they have found a better weapon. It be- came necessary for the Jackson men to bestir themselves in the matter. A direct question on the subject was propounded to the General and his answer was published in the Mobile Advertiser. Here he stated clearly that he favored protection for those industries which were of military importance, such as the manufacture of iron and cheap woolen goods, but that he was otherwise for a revenue tariff only.11 No clear case could be made for Adams, however, and the cause of Jackson was not seriously hurt by the issue.
A strong section of the local press favored Adams, and it was conceded that he would carry the southern part of the State, while Jackson was expected to carry the northern.12 An attempt was made to have the presidential electors chosen by district with the hope that two of the five could be carried for the New England candidate,13 but the plan was defeated and in 1823 the legislature declared Jackson to be the choice of the State.14 So great was the popularity of the General that even his enemies had to speak respectfully of him. Those mem- bers of the legislature who voted against the nomination took the trouble to explain that they did so, not because of hostili- ty, but because they did not consider the question a proper one
10 Alabama Republican, May 21, 1824, Oct. 8, 1824; Cahawba Press, July 10, 1824; Huntsville Democrat, June 24, 1824.
11 Tuscaloosa Mirror, May 29, 1824. Jackson did not refer simply to munitions of war, but meant to include all articles necessary to put the country in a condition of economic independence, considering this neces- sary to military safety. See letters to John Coffee, dated May 7, and June 18, 1824, in the Coffee correspondence.
12 Huntsville Democrat, Aug. 24, 1824; Alabama Republican, August 8, Oct. 1, 1824.
13 Alabama, Senate Journal, 1823, 12; Alabama Republican, Sept. 26, 1823.
1+ Alabama, Senate Journal, 1823, 82; House Journal, 1823, 77.
ยท
108
THE FORMATIVE PERIOD IN ALABAMA
for legislative action.15 Governor Pickens explained on the same grounds his failure to sign the nominating resolution.16 Indeed, the loss of popularity which one suffered by opposing Jackson brought many men to a new way of thinking. Dr. Henry Chambers was backed by the Georgia group when he ran for the governorship in 1821 and 1823,17 but he became a supporter of Jackson and was made presidential elector on the popular ticket in 1824. Nicholas Davis, who for five years was president of the State Senate, was an opponent of the State Bank and no friend of Jackson's, 18 but he so far gave way as to vote for the nomination by the legislature in 1823.
There was no regularly established political machinery in 1824, but co-operation was necessary in order to win a spirit- ed contest, and this was accomplished in an informal but ef- fective way. Public meetings of the friends of the several candidates were announced in the newspapers and held in the leading towns. These gatherings proposed electoral tickets and chose committees of correspondence. One of them, which was held at the court-house in Perry County on May 8, 1824, proposed that representatives be chosen by friends of Jackson in the various parts of the State and sent to a convention which should meet at Cahawba during the following session of the Supreme Court.19 The friends of Adams and Craw- ford followed this example, and accordingly there were three conventions held in due time at the seat of government. These were informally constituted bodies, consisting partly of rep- resentatives from various public meetings and partly of men who came without any public authorization. The Jackson delegation appears to have been the most representative. It considered the electoral ticket which had been promulgated by the local press; made some changes in it; and appointed a correspondence committee for each judicial circuit, authoriz- ing them to notify the nominated electors and to replace any who might decline to serve.20 The other conventions followed much the same lines of procedure, and placed before the vot- ers the electoral tickets which had already been generally agreed upon through the press.21
15 Alabama, House Journal, 1823, 120-125.
16 Niles' Register, XXV, 323-324, 362.
17 Greensboro Halcyon, Nov. 1, 1823.
1% Pickett, History of Alabama, 653-654.
19 Cahawba Press, May 8, 1824.
20 Cahawba Press, June 18, 1824.
21 Cahawba Press. June 28, 1824, July 7, 1824.
-
109
POLITICS AND THE ELECTION OF 1824
When the returns from the election came in, it was found that Jackson had a majority in every county in the State ex- cept three, -- Greene, Butler, and Montgomery .= 2 This unexpected strength of the General emphasizes the very im- portant point that it was not the editor, nor the politician, nor the planter who furnished the main support of Jackson, but the plain farmer who could vote more potently than he could talk. It became clear that the small farmer had the balance of power even in the counties where slaves were most numer- ous. He spoke his mind very clearly and carried his point when his mind was made up, but he did not differ from the planter on principle and never tried for separate control.
Some interesting information is obtainable from a study of the election of 1824. Over seventy-five per cent. of the vote went to Jackson in all the counties of the Tennessee Valley and the hilly region lying below it. The predominance of Tennes- seeans in the Valley and of small farmers in the hilly region accounts for this situation. The counties of the extreme south- east were also overwhelmingly for Jackson, and these, like the hill counties, had a minimum slave population. But in the basins of the Alabama and Tombigbee Rivers, the General fail- ed of a majority in three counties and carried but two with a vote as high as seventy-five per cent. Here the Tennesseeans were relatively few in numbers and the planters made up a greater proportion of the population. Crawford received an ap- preciable vote in only two counties, while Adams attracted the greater part of the opposition.
It is a significant fact that the Alabama-Tombigbee River basin, which later became the stronghold of Whigism, was car- ried for Jackson in 1824, yet with a smaller margin than he obtained in the other sections of the State. There was the nucleus here among the planters for a strong fight when cir- cumstances should give them an argument which could attract allies.
22 The returns are to be found in the Huntsville Democrat for Nov. 22, 1824, and in the Cahwba Press of the same date.
CHAPTER XII.
LOCAL POLITICS AND FEDERAL RELATIONS, 1824-1828.
After the election of 1824, there was a distinct change in the political situation in Alabama. No sooner was Jackson defeated than his friends announced their determination to "fight the battle o'er again,"1 and their opponents recognized the futility of a further struggle against the General. The administration was able to hold a few scattered supporters, but even the Southern Advocate, of Huntsville, which had been an ardent friend of Adams before the election, now went over to the cause of Jackson, though this change was clearly one of letter rather than of spirit. Among the Crawford men the defection was even more general. Their hero was no long- er in the race, and it was left for them to make the best terms they could for themselves. The new editor of the Huntsville Democrat, the acknowledged champion of "The People" in the State, admitted that he had supported Crawford in 1824,2 but former allegiance was not held against any man in those days unless there was some special reason for doing so. When resolutions proposing Jackson for the presidency were passed by the legislature in 1827, their mover was no other than Dixon H. Lewis, nephew of Bolling Hall, and closely connect- ed with all the supporters of Crawford who had led the Geor- gia faction in Alabama. Adams had to be beaten and only Jackson could beat him.
Yet beneath this general accord regarding Jackson, there were political divisions on local questions which were more sig- nificant of the true state of the public mind. In 1825 the term of Israel Pickens expired and John Murphy was elected to the governorship without opposition. Murphy, like Pickens, was from North Carolina, and a supporter of the State Bank. His unopposed election indicates the completeness of the tri- umph of the popular cause and is a tribute to the political sa- gacity of the retiring Governor.
The first important question to come up was the location of the capitol. The constitution had provided that, during the
1 Tuscumbian, March 7, 1825, from the Nashville Gazette.
2 Huntsville Democrat, Nov. 7, 1826.
------
LOCAL POLITICS AND FEDERAL RELATIONS, 1824-1828 111
session of 1825, the legislature might remove the seat of gov- ernment from Cahawba, but if no removal were made at that' time, the original seat would be permanent. The subject was taken up with alacrity and several new locations were propos- ed. The fight developed mainly between Cahawba and Tus- caloosa, the former being favored by the southern and south- eastern, the lattter by the northern and northwestern portions of the State. Cahawba was accessible to all the Alabama Riv- er region, while Tuscaloosa had the advantage of accessibility from the Tenessee Valley as well as water communication with the Tombigbee region. In the final struggle, the Ten- nessee, Tombigee, and Warrior valleys were able to outvote the Alabama River region, and the capitol went to Tuscaloosa.3 Cahawba had proved to be an unhealthy location, but it was urged against Tuscaloosa that it was too near the Mississippi line, and there was little prospect that the capital could remain there after the Indian lands east of the Coosa River should be opened up.
Such a question was not good for party purposes, but an- other came up at this time which was ridden for all it was. worth by the seekers for office.
In 1818 the legislature of Alabama Territory had passed an act which abolished all limitations on the amount of interest which might be charged on loans. John W. Walker then wrote to Tait saying that he was largely responsible for the measure, and asking his friend what he thought of it.+ It looks like a work of ignorance or, more probably, of self-ag- grandizement on the part of the law-makers, and it aroused such strong opposition at the time that it was repealed the next year without struggle. But, in the meantime, numerous con- tracts had been made under its provisions and the interest called for ranged from 60 to 240 per cent. a year. Many of these contracts provided that a certain sum was to be paid on a certain date, but that if the debt were not discharged as pre- scribed, it was to bear interest of from five to twenty per cent. a month until paid. A number of such contracts were carried out, but finally legal opposition was made and in 1824 it was decided by the Supreme Court of Alabama that the interest in contracts of this kind was in the nature of a penalty and hence illegal. This protected those who had not already paid, but
3 Alabama, House Journal. 1825, 75; Senate Journal. 1825, 47.
4 Tait Papers, J. W. Walker to C. Tait, Sept. 22, 1818.
112
THE FORMATIVE PERIOD IN ALABAMA
those who had paid were in another situation. They applied for relief, but the court decided in 1827 that a statute of limi- tations barred the recovery of money which had already been paid out under such contracts.5
This has the appearance of a purely legal matter, and so it should have been, but it was turned into a political question chiefly through the instrumentality of William Kelly who, having failed of re-election to the Senate in 1824, had returned to the legislature and was counsel for a number of those who were seeking to recover money paid out under the "big-inter- est" contracts and who lost their cases by the decision of 1827. Whereas the judges had been very popular because of their decision of. 1824, a cry was now raised against them. They were accused of being enemies of the people and in league with the money-lenders. The old cry against the "Royal Par- ty" of Huntsville was revived and there was said to be a "Rad- ical Party" in the south which was the counterpart of the northern royalists. This party was not supposed to be made up of any section of the public, but of a small group of men in the legislature,-the old guard of the Crawford faction,- who were working for their own interest. The Huntsville Democrat presented its view of the situation as follows:
"In no county in the State, has the spirit of local partyism raged with equal violence as in Madison County. . . But this local feeling has pervaded the whole state, in some coun- ties quite covertly ; while in others, it has burned with the ut- most intensity. Some twelve or fifteen years ago, the Indian title to a large portion of Alabama was extinguished and straighway the tide of emigration set strongly towards this fertile territory. Persons flocked to it from all quarters ; few of them wealthy-most from the expectation of bettering their fortunes. It was not to be presumed that a mass thrown thus loosely together could have pursued any systematic plan of in- ternal policy, or have been actuated by anything like an iden- tity of interests. It was consequently easy for an inconsid- erable minority acting in concert, and with a determinate and well understood purpose to give tone to public sentiment, to carry their measures, and possess themselves of all valuable offices. Now, such a minority did exist in this state. They were chiefly composed of Georgians, who, from previous ac-
5 Somerville, Trial of the Judges, 62-75; Brickel's Digest, Vol. II, Pt. 1, pages 4-5; Southern Advocate, Feb. 9, 1827, March 9, 1827; Huntsville Democrat, Jan. 19, 1827.
LOCAL POLITICS AND FEDERAL RELATIONS, 1824-1828 113
quaintance, attachment to the civil institutions of Georgia, and a more than common portion of wealth, seemed to be con- nected together by a tie, the strength of which they all recog- nized by the support which they mutually extended to each other. These circumstances inspired greater confi- dence, and led to such developments of their views, as to cre- ate a distrust of that purity of character for which they had heretofore obtained credit. They evinced a determination to monopolize all power, and to fill every office with their own creatures. Many of these were so glaringly deficient in the requisite qualifications. that the people began to discover the "family" arrangements which were making to impose rulers over them. The yeomanry of this country, devotedly attach- ed to Democratic principles, could but illy brook this assump- tion of superiority. It is to Israel Pickens that the people are chiefly indebted for their dethronement; it was he who first broke the charm and showed that the Georgians with all their management and manoeuvering were not invincible.
Madison County was their great headquarters; here it was that the plan of operations was generally framed; and from thence communicated to their partisans throughout the State."
The article goes on to say that these men had control of the Huntsville bank, and that they were responsible for the pas- sage of the act abolishing interest limitations in 1818.6
In 1826 Henry Chambers died and the vacancy thus left in the Senate was filled by the appointment of Israel Pickens. But ill health forced Pickens to resign during the same year, and the election of a successor soon occupied the attention of the legislature. The opposing candidates were John McKin- ley, a wealthy lawyer of Florence, and Clement C. Clay, a prominent attorney of Huntsville. Though Clay was a mem- ber of the Territorial Council and is said to have voted for the fateful interest bill of 1818, and though he was at one time a stock-holder in the Merchants' and Planters' Bank of Hunts- ville, he did not become identified with the capitalist group at Huntsville and seems to have kept himself square with the people. In 1820 he became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, but resigned that position in 1823 to re- sume his legal practice." This was his first appearance be- fore the public since that time, and there seems to have been no reason why he should not have received the support of the
6 Huntsville Democrat, Feb. 9, 1827.
>
114
THE FORMATIVE PERIOD IN ALABAMA
popular party, but the Huntsville Democrat opposed him for reasons which are not evident and gave its support to McKin- ley, whom the same paper had opposed and labeled an aristo- crat when he stood against Kelley for the Senate in 1822.
That all this talk about party, though based upon certain concrete facts, was largely worked up for campaign purposes, is indicated by an apparently candid statement made by Mc- Kinley shortly before the election of 1826. It runs as follows : "I know nothing of the Royal party or its policy, further than I have seen the subject discussed in the newspapers, and as far as comprehended by that discussion, I have no personal or political interest in it. I had been a citizen of this state about a year before I ever heard of the existence of a party in it. I was then informed by a friend, if I supported a particu- lar individual for Governor, I would be considered as belong- ing to the Georgia party. What was meant by this party, I did not know, nor could my friend inform me as he was equal- ly a stranger to its meaning or object. In 1821, I heard for the first time of the Royal party, and was equally at a loss to know what was the meaning of the name or the object of that party. In the fall of that year, I removed to this place where I heard but little more of parties until the fall of 1822, when I became a candidate for the same office for which I am now a candidate. When at the seat of government pending the election between Judge Kelly and myself, the charge of belonging to the Georgia party, Huntsville, and Royal party, was brought to bear upon my election. I had no mode of de- fending myself against the charge, but simply denying that I belonged to any party, which was the fact. In that contest I was beaten by a single vote, to which I submitted, I hope, with becoming propriety. I continued to reside in this place until February, 1825, without hearing my name connected with party, and having kept myself aloof from all party con- tests, had hoped to escape such an unfounded, and as I con- ceived, ungenerous imputation. But shortly after my return to Huntsville in the early part of 1825 this charge was revived against me, although I was a candidate for no office, nor took any active part in the local or general politics of the country. In the year 1823 a newspaper discussion took place in the
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.