Topzle Topzle

1844 United States presidential election

Updated: Wikipedia source

1844 United States presidential election

Presidential elections were held in the United States from November 1 to December 4, 1844. Democratic nominee James K. Polk narrowly defeated Whig Henry Clay in a close contest turning on the controversial issues of slavery and the annexation of the Republic of Texas. This is the only election in which both major party nominees served as Speaker of the House at one point, and the first in which neither candidate held elective office at the time. President John Tyler's pursuit of Texas annexation divided both major parties. Annexation would geographically expand American slavery. It also risked war with Mexico while the United States engaged in sensitive possession and boundary negotiations with Great Britain, which controlled Canada, over Oregon. Texas annexation thus posed both domestic and foreign policy risks. Both major parties had wings in the North and the South, but the possibility of the expansion of slavery threatened a sectional split in each party. Expelled by the Whig Party after vetoing key Whig legislation and lacking a firm political base, Tyler hoped to use the annexation of Texas to win the presidency as an independent or at least to have decisive, pro-Texas influence over the election. The early leader for the Democratic nomination was former President Martin Van Buren, but his opposition to the annexation of Texas damaged his candidacy. Opposition from former President Andrew Jackson and most Southern delegations, plus a nomination rule change specifically aimed to block him, prevented Van Buren from winning the necessary two-thirds vote of delegates to the 1844 Democratic National Convention. The convention instead chose James K. Polk, former Governor of Tennessee and Speaker. He was the first successful dark horse for the presidency. Polk ran on a platform embracing popular commitment to expansion, often referred to as Manifest Destiny. Tyler dropped out of the race and endorsed Polk. The Whigs nominated Henry Clay, a famous, long-time party leader who was the early favorite but who conspicuously waffled on Texas annexation. Though a Southerner from Kentucky and a slave owner, Clay chose to focus on the risks of annexation while claiming not to oppose it personally. His awkward, repeated attempts to adjust and finesse his position on Texas confused and alienated voters, contrasting negatively with Polk's consistent clarity. Polk successfully linked the dispute with Britain over Oregon with the Texas issue. The Democratic nominee thus united anti-slavery Northern expansionists, who demanded Oregon, with pro-slavery Southern expansionists who demanded Texas. In the national popular vote, Polk beat Clay by fewer than 40,000 votes, a margin of 1.4%. James G. Birney of the anti-slavery Liberty Party won 2.3% of the vote. Birney's vote share in New York exceeded Polk's margin of victory over Clay, marking the first time a third party candidate affected the outcome of a United States presidential election. After Polk's victory, Tyler annexed Texas, which was the proximate cause of the Mexican–American War during Polk's presidency.

Infobox

Party
Democratic
Nominee
James K. Polk
Turnout
79.2% 1.1 pp
Percentage
49.54%
Home state
Tennessee
Popular vote
1,339,494
Running mate
George M. Dallas[a]
Electoral vote
170
States carried
15

Tables

· Nominations › Democratic Party convention and campaign
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000003B-QINU`"'James K. Polk
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000003B-QINU`"'James K. Polk
1844 Democratic Party ticket
'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000003B-QINU`"'James K. Polk
1844 Democratic Party ticket
George M. Dallas
for President
for President
1844 Democratic Party ticket
for President
1844 Democratic Party ticket
for Vice President
Campaign
Campaign
1844 Democratic Party ticket
Campaign
1844 Democratic Party ticket
 `UNIQ--templatestyles-0000003B-QINU` James K. Polk
George M. Dallas
for President
for Vice President
13th Speaker Of The United States House of Representatives(1835–1839)9th Governor of Tennessee(1839–1841)
United States Minister To Russia(1837–1839)
Campaign
· Nominations › Whig Party convention and campaign
Henry Clay
Henry Clay
1844 Whig Party ticket
Henry Clay
1844 Whig Party ticket
Theodore Frelinghuysen
for President
for President
1844 Whig Party ticket
for President
1844 Whig Party ticket
for Vice President
7thSpeaker of the House(1811–1814, 1815–1820, 1823–1825)
7thSpeaker of the House(1811–1814, 1815–1820, 1823–1825)
1844 Whig Party ticket
7thSpeaker of the House(1811–1814, 1815–1820, 1823–1825)
1844 Whig Party ticket
2nd Chancellor Of New York University(1839–1850)
1844 Whig Party ticket
Henry Clay
Theodore Frelinghuysen
for President
for Vice President
7thSpeaker of the House(1811–1814, 1815–1820, 1823–1825)
2nd Chancellor Of New York University(1839–1850)
Electoral results · Results › Allegations of fraud
Count
Count
Presidential candidate
Count
Party
Percentage
Home state
Vice-presidential candidate
Popular vote(a)
Home state
Popular vote(a)
Electoral vote
James K. Polk
James K. Polk
Presidential candidate
James K. Polk
Party
Democratic
Home state
Tennessee
Popular vote(a)
1,339,494
Popular vote(a)
49.54%
Electoralvote
170
Running mate
George M. Dallas
Running mate
Pennsylvania
Running mate
170
Henry Clay
Henry Clay
Presidential candidate
Henry Clay
Party
Whig
Home state
Kentucky
Popular vote(a)
1,300,004
Popular vote(a)
48.08%
Electoralvote
105
Running mate
Theodore Frelinghuysen
Running mate
New York
Running mate
105
James G. Birney
James G. Birney
Presidential candidate
James G. Birney
Party
Liberty
Home state
Michigan
Popular vote(a)
62,103
Popular vote(a)
2.30%
Electoralvote
0
Running mate
Thomas Morris
Running mate
Ohio
Running mate
0
Other
Other
Presidential candidate
Other
Party
2,058
Home state
0.08%
Popular vote(a)
Popular vote(a)
Other
Electoralvote
Total
Total
Presidential candidate
Total
Party
2,703,659
Home state
100%
Popular vote(a)
275
Electoralvote
275
Needed to win
Needed to win
Presidential candidate
Needed to win
Party
138
Popular vote(a)
138
Presidential candidate
Party
Home state
Popular vote(a)
Electoralvote
Running mate
Count
Percentage
Vice-presidential candidate
Home state
Electoral vote
James K. Polk
Democratic
Tennessee
1,339,494
49.54%
170
George M. Dallas
Pennsylvania
170
Henry Clay
Whig
Kentucky
1,300,004
48.08%
105
Theodore Frelinghuysen
New York
105
James G. Birney
Liberty
Michigan
62,103
2.30%
0
Thomas Morris
Ohio
0
Other
2,058
0.08%
Other
Total
2,703,659
100%
275
275
Needed to win
138
138
· Results by state
States/districts won by Clay/Frelinghuysen
States/districts won by Clay/Frelinghuysen
States/districts won by Polk/Dallas
States/districts won by Clay/Frelinghuysen
States/districts won by Polk/Dallas
States/districts won by Clay/Frelinghuysen
State
State
Col 1
State
Col 2
electoralvotes
James K. PolkDemocratic
#
James K. PolkDemocratic
%
James K. PolkDemocratic
electoralvotes
Henry ClayWhig
#
Henry ClayWhig
%
Henry ClayWhig
electoralvotes
James G. BirneyLiberty
#
James G. BirneyLiberty
%
James G. BirneyLiberty
electoralvotes
Margin
#
Margin
%
State Total
#
Alabama
Alabama
Col 1
Alabama
Col 2
9
James K. PolkDemocratic
0001361837,401
James K. PolkDemocratic
58.99
James K. PolkDemocratic
9
Henry ClayWhig
0004866926,002
Henry ClayWhig
41.01
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
11,399
James G. BirneyLiberty
17.98
Margin
63,403
Margin
AL
Arkansas
Arkansas
Col 1
Arkansas
Col 2
3
James K. PolkDemocratic
9,546
James K. PolkDemocratic
63.01
James K. PolkDemocratic
3
Henry ClayWhig
5,604
Henry ClayWhig
36.99
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
3,942
James G. BirneyLiberty
26.02
Margin
15,150
Margin
AR
Connecticut
Connecticut
Col 1
Connecticut
Col 2
6
James K. PolkDemocratic
29,841
James K. PolkDemocratic
46.18
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
32,832
Henry ClayWhig
50.81
Henry ClayWhig
6
James G. BirneyLiberty
1,943
James G. BirneyLiberty
3.01
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-2,991
Margin
-4.63
State Total
64,616
State Total
CT
Delaware
Delaware
Col 1
Delaware
Col 2
3
James K. PolkDemocratic
5,970
James K. PolkDemocratic
48.75
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
6,271
Henry ClayWhig
51.20
Henry ClayWhig
3
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
-301
James G. BirneyLiberty
-2.45
Margin
12,247
Margin
DE
Georgia
Georgia
Col 1
Georgia
Col 2
10
James K. PolkDemocratic
44,147
James K. PolkDemocratic
51.19
James K. PolkDemocratic
10
Henry ClayWhig
42,100
Henry ClayWhig
48.81
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
2,047
James G. BirneyLiberty
2.38
Margin
86,247
Margin
GA
Illinois
Illinois
Col 1
Illinois
Col 2
9
James K. PolkDemocratic
58,795
James K. PolkDemocratic
53.91
James K. PolkDemocratic
9
Henry ClayWhig
45,854
Henry ClayWhig
42.05
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
3,469
James G. BirneyLiberty
3.18
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
12,941
Margin
11.86
State Total
109,057
State Total
IL
Indiana
Indiana
Col 1
Indiana
Col 2
12
James K. PolkDemocratic
70,181
James K. PolkDemocratic
50.07
James K. PolkDemocratic
12
Henry ClayWhig
67,867
Henry ClayWhig
48.42
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
2,106
James G. BirneyLiberty
1.50
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
2,314
Margin
1.65
State Total
140,154
State Total
IN
Kentucky
Kentucky
Col 1
Kentucky
Col 2
12
James K. PolkDemocratic
51,988
James K. PolkDemocratic
45.91
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
61,249
Henry ClayWhig
54.09
Henry ClayWhig
12
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
-9,261
James G. BirneyLiberty
-8.18
Margin
116,865
Margin
KY
Louisiana
Louisiana
Col 1
Louisiana
Col 2
6
James K. PolkDemocratic
13,782
James K. PolkDemocratic
51.30
James K. PolkDemocratic
6
Henry ClayWhig
13,083
Henry ClayWhig
48.70
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
699
James G. BirneyLiberty
2.60
Margin
26,865
Margin
LA
Maine
Maine
Col 1
Maine
Col 2
9
James K. PolkDemocratic
45,719
James K. PolkDemocratic
53.83
James K. PolkDemocratic
9
Henry ClayWhig
34,378
Henry ClayWhig
40.48
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
4,836
James G. BirneyLiberty
5.69
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
11,341
Margin
13.35
State Total
84,933
State Total
ME
Maryland
Maryland
Col 1
Maryland
Col 2
8
James K. PolkDemocratic
32,706
James K. PolkDemocratic
47.61
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
35,984
Henry ClayWhig
52.39
Henry ClayWhig
8
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
-3,278
James G. BirneyLiberty
-4.78
Margin
68,690
Margin
MD
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
Col 1
Massachusetts
Col 2
12
James K. PolkDemocratic
53,039
James K. PolkDemocratic
40.17
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
67,062
Henry ClayWhig
50.79
Henry ClayWhig
12
James G. BirneyLiberty
10,830
James G. BirneyLiberty
8.20
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-14,023
Margin
-10.62
State Total
132,037
State Total
MA
Michigan
Michigan
Col 1
Michigan
Col 2
5
James K. PolkDemocratic
27,737
James K. PolkDemocratic
49.75
James K. PolkDemocratic
5
Henry ClayWhig
24,375
Henry ClayWhig
43.72
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
3,639
James G. BirneyLiberty
6.53
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
3,362
Margin
6.03
State Total
55,751
State Total
MI
Mississippi
Mississippi
Col 1
Mississippi
Col 2
6
James K. PolkDemocratic
25,846
James K. PolkDemocratic
57.43
James K. PolkDemocratic
6
Henry ClayWhig
19,158
Henry ClayWhig
42.57
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
6,688
James G. BirneyLiberty
14.85
Margin
45,004
Margin
MS
Missouri
Missouri
Col 1
Missouri
Col 2
7
James K. PolkDemocratic
41,322
James K. PolkDemocratic
56.98
James K. PolkDemocratic
7
Henry ClayWhig
31,200
Henry ClayWhig
43.02
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
10,122
James G. BirneyLiberty
13.96
Margin
72,522
Margin
MO
New Hampshire
New Hampshire
Col 1
New Hampshire
Col 2
6
James K. PolkDemocratic
27,160
James K. PolkDemocratic
55.22
James K. PolkDemocratic
6
Henry ClayWhig
17,866
Henry ClayWhig
36.32
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
4,161
James G. BirneyLiberty
8.46
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
9,294
Margin
18.90
State Total
49,187
State Total
NH
New Jersey
New Jersey
Col 1
New Jersey
Col 2
7
James K. PolkDemocratic
37,495
James K. PolkDemocratic
49.37
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
38,318
Henry ClayWhig
50.46
Henry ClayWhig
7
James G. BirneyLiberty
131
James G. BirneyLiberty
0.17
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-823
Margin
-1.09
State Total
75,944
State Total
NJ
New York
New York
Col 1
New York
Col 2
36
James K. PolkDemocratic
237,588
James K. PolkDemocratic
48.90
James K. PolkDemocratic
36
Henry ClayWhig
232,482
Henry ClayWhig
47.85
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
15,812
James G. BirneyLiberty
3.25
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
5,106
Margin
1.05
State Total
485,882
State Total
NY
North Carolina
North Carolina
Col 1
North Carolina
Col 2
11
James K. PolkDemocratic
39,287
James K. PolkDemocratic
47.61
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
43,232
Henry ClayWhig
52.39
Henry ClayWhig
11
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
-3,945
James G. BirneyLiberty
-4.78
Margin
82,521
Margin
NC
Ohio
Ohio
Col 1
Ohio
Col 2
23
James K. PolkDemocratic
149,061
James K. PolkDemocratic
47.74
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
155,113
Henry ClayWhig
49.68
Henry ClayWhig
23
James G. BirneyLiberty
8,050
James G. BirneyLiberty
2.58
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-6,052
Margin
-1.94
State Total
312,224
State Total
OH
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania
Col 1
Pennsylvania
Col 2
26
James K. PolkDemocratic
167,447
James K. PolkDemocratic
50.50
James K. PolkDemocratic
26
Henry ClayWhig
161,125
Henry ClayWhig
48.59
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
3,000
James G. BirneyLiberty
0.90
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
6,322
Margin
1.91
State Total
331,572
State Total
PA
Rhode Island
Rhode Island
Col 1
Rhode Island
Col 2
4
James K. PolkDemocratic
4,867
James K. PolkDemocratic
39.58
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
7,322
Henry ClayWhig
59.55
Henry ClayWhig
4
James G. BirneyLiberty
107
James G. BirneyLiberty
0.87
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-2,455
Margin
-19.97
State Total
12,296
State Total
RI
South Carolina
South Carolina
Col 1
South Carolina
Col 2
9
James K. PolkDemocratic
no popular vote
James K. PolkDemocratic
9
James K. PolkDemocratic
no popular vote
Henry ClayWhig
no popular vote
Henry ClayWhig
-
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
SC
Tennessee
Tennessee
Col 1
Tennessee
Col 2
13
James K. PolkDemocratic
59,917
James K. PolkDemocratic
49.95
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
60,040
Henry ClayWhig
50.05
Henry ClayWhig
13
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
-123
James G. BirneyLiberty
-0.10
Margin
119,957
Margin
TN
Vermont
Vermont
Col 1
Vermont
Col 2
6
James K. PolkDemocratic
18,049
James K. PolkDemocratic
36.96
James K. PolkDemocratic
-
Henry ClayWhig
26,780
Henry ClayWhig
54.84
Henry ClayWhig
6
James G. BirneyLiberty
3,970
James G. BirneyLiberty
8.13
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
-8,731
Margin
-17.88
State Total
48,829
State Total
VT
Virginia
Virginia
Col 1
Virginia
Col 2
17
James K. PolkDemocratic
50,679
James K. PolkDemocratic
53.05
James K. PolkDemocratic
17
Henry ClayWhig
44,860
Henry ClayWhig
46.95
Henry ClayWhig
-
James G. BirneyLiberty
no ballots
James G. BirneyLiberty
5,819
James G. BirneyLiberty
6.10
Margin
95,539
Margin
VA
TOTALS:
TOTALS:
Col 1
TOTALS:
Col 2
275
James K. PolkDemocratic
1,339,570
James K. PolkDemocratic
49.54
James K. PolkDemocratic
170
Henry ClayWhig
1,300,157
Henry ClayWhig
48.09
Henry ClayWhig
105
James G. BirneyLiberty
62,054
James G. BirneyLiberty
2.30
James G. BirneyLiberty
-
Margin
39,413
Margin
1.45
State Total
2,703,864
State Total
US
TO WIN:
TO WIN:
Col 1
TO WIN:
Col 2
138
James K. PolkDemocratic
Henry ClayWhig
James G. BirneyLiberty
Margin
State Total
State
electoralvotes
#
%
electoralvotes
#
%
electoralvotes
#
%
electoralvotes
#
%
#
Alabama
9
0001361837,401
58.99
9
0004866926,002
41.01
-
no ballots
11,399
17.98
63,403
AL
Arkansas
3
9,546
63.01
3
5,604
36.99
-
no ballots
3,942
26.02
15,150
AR
Connecticut
6
29,841
46.18
-
32,832
50.81
6
1,943
3.01
-
-2,991
-4.63
64,616
CT
Delaware
3
5,970
48.75
-
6,271
51.20
3
no ballots
-301
-2.45
12,247
DE
Georgia
10
44,147
51.19
10
42,100
48.81
-
no ballots
2,047
2.38
86,247
GA
Illinois
9
58,795
53.91
9
45,854
42.05
-
3,469
3.18
-
12,941
11.86
109,057
IL
Indiana
12
70,181
50.07
12
67,867
48.42
-
2,106
1.50
-
2,314
1.65
140,154
IN
Kentucky
12
51,988
45.91
-
61,249
54.09
12
no ballots
-9,261
-8.18
116,865
KY
Louisiana
6
13,782
51.30
6
13,083
48.70
-
no ballots
699
2.60
26,865
LA
Maine
9
45,719
53.83
9
34,378
40.48
-
4,836
5.69
-
11,341
13.35
84,933
ME
Maryland
8
32,706
47.61
-
35,984
52.39
8
no ballots
-3,278
-4.78
68,690
MD
Massachusetts
12
53,039
40.17
-
67,062
50.79
12
10,830
8.20
-
-14,023
-10.62
132,037
MA
Michigan
5
27,737
49.75
5
24,375
43.72
-
3,639
6.53
-
3,362
6.03
55,751
MI
Mississippi
6
25,846
57.43
6
19,158
42.57
-
no ballots
6,688
14.85
45,004
MS
Missouri
7
41,322
56.98
7
31,200
43.02
-
no ballots
10,122
13.96
72,522
MO
New Hampshire
6
27,160
55.22
6
17,866
36.32
-
4,161
8.46
-
9,294
18.90
49,187
NH
New Jersey
7
37,495
49.37
-
38,318
50.46
7
131
0.17
-
-823
-1.09
75,944
NJ
New York
36
237,588
48.90
36
232,482
47.85
-
15,812
3.25
-
5,106
1.05
485,882
NY
North Carolina
11
39,287
47.61
-
43,232
52.39
11
no ballots
-3,945
-4.78
82,521
NC
Ohio
23
149,061
47.74
-
155,113
49.68
23
8,050
2.58
-
-6,052
-1.94
312,224
OH
Pennsylvania
26
167,447
50.50
26
161,125
48.59
-
3,000
0.90
-
6,322
1.91
331,572
PA
Rhode Island
4
4,867
39.58
-
7,322
59.55
4
107
0.87
-
-2,455
-19.97
12,296
RI
South Carolina
9
no popular vote
9
no popular vote
no popular vote
-
-
-
SC
Tennessee
13
59,917
49.95
-
60,040
50.05
13
no ballots
-123
-0.10
119,957
TN
Vermont
6
18,049
36.96
-
26,780
54.84
6
3,970
8.13
-
-8,731
-17.88
48,829
VT
Virginia
17
50,679
53.05
17
44,860
46.95
-
no ballots
5,819
6.10
95,539
VA
TOTALS:
275
1,339,570
49.54
170
1,300,157
48.09
105
62,054
2.30
-
39,413
1.45
2,703,864
US
TO WIN:
138
· Results by state › Electoral College selection
Each Elector appointed by state legislature
Each Elector appointed by state legislature
Method of choosing electors
Each Elector appointed by state legislature
State(s)
South Carolina
Each Elector chosen by voters statewide
Each Elector chosen by voters statewide
Method of choosing electors
Each Elector chosen by voters statewide
State(s)
(all other States)
Method of choosing electors
State(s)
Each Elector appointed by state legislature
South Carolina
Each Elector chosen by voters statewide
(all other States)

References

  1. Silas Wright had originally been nominated to serve as Polk's running mate; however, Wright declined the nomination and
  2. Presidential Elections, 1844
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/community.10637320
  3. United States Election Project
    http://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present
  4. Wilentz, 2008, p. 570: Wright declined: "To do otherwise...would have been a renunciation of both his personal loyalties
  5. Freehling, 1991, p. 352: "The Gag Rule Controversy had sketched the battle lines" in the approaching crisis over slavery
  6. Freehling, 1991, p. 410: "Artificially segregating Whigs' response to gag and Texas crises...hinders awareness that the
  7. May 2008, p. 97: "...eight [northern] state legislatures sent Congress petitions warning against [Texas annexation]."
  8. Miller, 1998, p. 285: "There had already been...resolutions by state legislatures that were summarily dismissed on the s
  9. Wilentz, 2008, p. 558: The Gag Rule debates caused "the heightening of sectional tensions in Congress [making] it impera
  10. Miller, 1998, p. 285: "[I]f the annexation of Texas were to be discussed on the House floor it would certainly lead to a
  11. Widmer, 2005, p. 15: In the early 1840s "it had become clear that an apocalyptic battle was looming between... Union and
  12. Wilentz, 2008, p. 561: "Texas annexation had long been a taboo subject for Whigs and Democrats alike."
  13. Wilentz, 2008, p. 560: Jackson was "happy to recognize the new Texas republic but refused to annex it because it could w
  14. Meacham, 2008 p. 324: "Stephen Austin implored Jackson to militarily support Texas independence 1836. The president comm
  15. Widmer, 2005, p. 148: "There were a number of very good reasons to oppose taking Texas..."
  16. Wilentz, 2008, p. 560: "...both Jackson and Van Buren would avoid...war with Mexico." Freehling, 1991, p. 367: "Jackson
  17. Freehling, 1991, p. 367-368: During his presidency, Van Buren considered Texas annexation "potentially poisonous to Amer
  18. Finkelman. 2011, p. 28: "Never truly a Whig, Tyler opposed almost every policy the party stood for."
  19. Holt, 2005, p. 10: Tyler was "...deeply devoted to the perpetuation of slavery..."
  20. Freehling, 1991, p. 410: "...Northern Whigs had warned that Texas would be the Slavepower's next outsized demand after t
  21. Holt, 2005, p. 10: In response to Tyler's vetoes "Whig congressmen and most state Whig organizations formally read Tyler
  22. Freehling, 1991, p. 364: Tyler was "almost unanimously excommunicated...from the [Whig] party."
  23. Merry, 2009, p. 67 "[Tyler], refusing to embrace the Whig agenda...had essentially become a president without a party, a
  24. Freehling, 1991, p. 355-356: "Tyler and his southern advisers "were composed of a few states' rights Whigs and fewer dis
  25. Freehling, 1991, p.402: "Sam Houston's movement away from [annexation by] the United States left the American establishm
  26. Holt, 2005, p. 10: "...Tyler hit upon the annexation of Texas as an issue on which he might win the presidency in 1844."
  27. May 2008, p. 99: "Tyler desperately wanted to win election in 1844 and believed that acquiring Texas would earn him favo
  28. Finkelman, 2011, p. 30: "Some southerners argued that Britain would end slavery in Texas and this would lead to slaves f
  29. Holt, 2005, p. 10: "England's repeated attempts to persuade authorities in the Republic of Texas to abolish slavery...in
  30. Finkelman, 2001, p. 28-29: "...in 1843 [Tyler] began secret negotiations with Texas."
  31. May 2008, p. 112:"Tyler's furtive negotiations with the Texans..." on the annexation treaty.
  32. Freehling, 1991, p. 398: "On October 16 Upshur met with Texas Minister Van Zandt and urged immediate negotiations toward
  33. Freehling, 1991, p. 408: "On April 22, 1844, the Senate received the pre-treaty correspondence [and] the [Tyler] treaty.
  34. Finkelman, 2011, p. 29: "A treaty required a two-thirds majority [in the Senate] for ratification."
  35. Freehling, 1991, p. 407: "The new Secretary of State [Calhoun] reached Washington March 29, 1844."
  36. Freehling, 1991, p. 415: "...Calhoun could only begin to provoke a 'sense of crisis' with southern Democrats", and "The
  37. Freehling, 1991, p. 408: The Packenham Letter "declared the national [Texas] treaty a sectional weapon, designed to prot
  38. May 2008, p. 112-113: "Calhoun...insisted that the'peculiar institution' was, in fact, 'a political institution necessar
  39. Freehling, 2008, p. 409-410: "Nothing would have made Northern Whigs tolerate the [Packenham] document, and Northern Dem
  40. Finkelman. 2011, p. 26: "James K. Polk's victory over Henry Clay in 1844 was directly tied to the Texas annexation quest
  41. Freehling, 1991, p. 424: Texas "was politically and economically sublime for slavery; and annexationists demanded the so
  42. Widmer, 2005, p. 148: "Texas...forced all candidates to declare whether they were for or against annexation"
  43. Wilentz, 2008: "Instantly, the letter became a public litmus test" for both national parties: "support Texas and it pro-
  44. Holt, 2005, p. 7: "...Martin Van Buren took the lead in constructing the Democratic Party..."
  45. Widmer, 2005, p. 58: "[Van Buren's] vision was indispensable to the rise of the phenomenon we call Jacksonian Democracy.
  46. Freehling, 1991, p. 369: Van Buren "seemingly had the Democratic Party's nomination secured" and p. 411: "...cruising to
  47. Wilentz, 2008, p. 558: "By early 1844, Martin Van Buren and the Radical Democrats controlled the party's nominating mach
  48. Wilentz, 2008, p. 558-559: "Calhoun's departure from the presidential race in January 1844 appeared to seal Van Buren's
  49. Freehling, 1991, p. 411 "...a southern roadblock..." to Van Buren's nomination.
  50. Freehling, 1991, p. 413: A test to determine "whether southern extremists could pressure moderate Southern Democrats to
  51. Miller, 1998, p. 484: Italics in original
  52. Widmer, 2005, p. 150 "...the original 'dark horse' candidate."
  53. World Book
  54. Crapol, 2006, p. 215: "The capacity crowd in the auditorium listened attentively as the eighty-three-year-old Gallatin s
  55. Freehling, 1991, p. 412: Van Buren "filled his Hammet letter with conditions" obstructing the road to annexation "becaus
  56. Widmer, 2005, p.149: Van Buren stated "in no uncertain terms he was opposed to Texas annexation...He did not foreclose o
  57. Freehling, 1991, p. 413: "Van Buren...offered Southerners a delay [on annexation] that would be tolerable to the North."
  58. Widmer, 2005, p. 149: "Van Buren wrote out a reply on April 20 that reshaped the campaign..."
  59. Freehling, 1991, p.412: Van Buren's letter "came fused with a pledge to administer annexation...assuming the American ma
  60. Wilentz, 2008, p. 568: "...the letters thrust was strongly annexation" but he included "a vague concession to the South"
  61. Widmer, 2005, p. 149: Van Buren "did not foreclose on the future possibility of accepting Texas under the right circumst
  62. May 2008, p. 113: Van Buren agreed to "accept Texas annexation if it did not mean a war with Mexico, did not exacerbate
  63. Freehling, 1991, p. 427: "Clay, in contrast [to Van Buren] would halt annexation unless Mexico assented."
  64. Freehling, 1991, p. 428: "Van Buren erred...in thinking that delay [in annexation] was tolerable" to Southern Democrats.
  65. Freehling, 1991, p. 426: "Southern Democrats had long since discovered, particularly in gag rule politics, that enough N
  66. Freehling, 1991, p. 428: Van Buren's response to Calhoun's Packenham letter "produced a special fury when Southern Democ
  67. Widmer, 2005, p. 149: "Immediately after the publication of the Hammett Letter, southerners let loose a howl of 'fever a
  68. Freehling, 1991, p. 428: Van Buren "was finished as a candidate in their section."
  69. Brown, 1966, p. 33: "Ritchie and Van Buren, after nearly a quarter century of fruitful political teamwork, would part co
  70. Freehling, 1991, p. 415: Jackson's support for immediate Texas annexation "lent enormous credibility to Calhoun" after t
  71. Freehling, 1991, p. 404: "Jackson would assure Texas President [Sam Houston] that...annexation could now become a realit
  72. Freehling,1991, p. 416, p. 417: "Jackson joined Calhoun and Tyler in seeing Texas's vulnerability as England's opportuni
  73. Freehling, 1991, p. 415: "Now the old general [Jackson] urged...his supporters to nominate someone other than Van Buren"
  74. Merry, 2009, p. 78: "Van Buren's position within the Democratic Party was unraveling."
  75. Holt, 2008, p. 11: Van Buren's supporters "raged that Texas annexation had been used to derail Van Buren's nomination."
  76. Wilentz, 2008, p. 573
  77. HISTORY
    https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/james-polk
  78. May 2008, p. 115: The US Senate "voted thirty-five to sixteen to defeat the treaty."
  79. Freehling, 1991, p. 431
  80. Freehling, 1991, p. 431: "...the Senate rejected the treaty by over two-thirds, 35-16, on June 8, 1844. Whigs voted 27-1
  81. Freehling, 1991, p. 431: "...three days after the treaty was defeated...Tyler urged Congress to admit Texas by simple ma
  82. Finkelman, 2011, p. 29: "...Tyler abandoned his strict constructionist constitutional scruples, which dictated that anne
  83. Freehling, 1991, p. 432: "The resulting bitter senatorial confrontation on Tyler's proposed evasion of the two-thirds ro
  84. Holt, 2005, p. 10: "Clay had engineered the formation of the Whig Party in 1834..."
  85. Wilentz, 2008, p. 569: The Whig convention "unanimously approved Clay's nomination"..."a thoroughly joyous and exciting
  86. Wilentz, 2008, p. 569: The Whig convention [of 1844] in Baltimore, which assembled on May 1..."
  87. Finkelman. 2011, p. 18: "In Congress, the Whigs had blocked Texas annexation, with southern Whigs joining their northern
  88. Wilentz, 2008, p. 569: The Whig platform "did not even mention Texas..."
  89. Finkelmn, 2011, p. 21: Whigs regarded the election as a "cakewalk", believing Clay would swamp Polk.
  90. Freehling, 1991, p. 360:"...Southern Whigs used the same electioneering hoopla in 1844..." as in 1840.
  91. Finkelman. 2011, p. 18: "In the South, Whigs argued that annexation would harm slavery because a large migration to Texa
  92. Finkelman. 2011, p. 18: "Northern Whigs, joined by some northern Democrats, saw Texas as a great "Empire for Slavery".
  93. Freeling, 1991, p. 427: The "so-called Raleigh letter of April 17, 1844."
  94. Holt, 2005, p 10: Clay declared Texas annexation "fraught with danger to the nation" and would "erode national comity" a
  95. Freehling, 1991, p. 427: "While Clay concurred with Van Buren on opposing the Calhoun-Tyler [Texas] treaty, the two oppo
  96. Freehling, 1991, p. 427: "Clay...would halt annexation unless Mexico assented. He would also deny Texas entrance in the
  97. Freehling, 1991, p. 426–427: "Southern Whigs thus had to weigh the possibility that Texas might be abolitionized [by Gre
  98. Wilentz, 2008, p. 568-569: "The Texas issue struck [Clay] as a giant distraction from the real issues...internal improve
  99. Freehling, 1991, p. 353, p. 355, p. 436
  100. Finkelman. 2011, p. 22: "The Whigs wanted to talk about the tariff and currency, which were no longer exciting issues."
  101. Finkelman, 2008, p. 21: "...as an avid colonizationist [Freylinghuysen's] conservative views on slavery made him accepta
  102. Finkelman. 2011, p. 17, p. 21: Freylinghuysen "the perfect northerner to balance the somewhat sordid reputation of the s
  103. Wilentz, 2008, p. 569: Freylinghuysen served to "offset Clay's reputation for moral laxity..."
  104. Finkelman. 2011, p. 22: The "less than snappy slogan..."
  105. Freehling, 1991, p. 435: "Even anti-slavery American should consent to annexation counseled Clay" because diffusion of s
  106. Freehling, 1991, p. 435: "Clay admitted he would be glad to see [Texas annexation], without dishonor, without war [and]
  107. Freehling, 1991, p. 435: "Northern Whigs, enraged by Clays' newly announced personal preference for Texas, accused Clay
  108. Freehling, 1991, p. 437: "In 1844, Whigs stood damned as soft on Texas, therefore soft on slavery."
  109. Holt, 2008, p. 12-13: Fearing to be cast as "soft on slavery" (see Freehling, 1991, p. 437), "southern Whigs could be po
  110. Wilentz, 2008, p. 573
  111. May 2008, p. 113: "Tyler, all hope of success nearly gone, had only one option left – to launch his own party and attemp
  112. May, 2008, p. 113: "...so-called Democratic-Republican Party; the name a tribute to [Tyler's] beloved Jefferson..."
  113. May 2008, p. 114: Tyler "did not select a running mate."
  114. May 2008, p. 119: "The more Tyler could challenge Polk's chances the more certain he was that Polk would deliver on anne
  115. May 2008, p. 119-120: "All that Polk needed was a mechanism that would allow Tyler to gracefully drop out of the race wi
  116. May 2008, p. 120: "Tyler supporters easily switched their allegiance to Polk..."
  117. U.S. Presidential Elections and the Candidates: A Biographical and Historical Guide
  118. National Party Conventions, 1831-1976
  119. Smith, Joseph Jr.
    http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/u?/NCMP1820-1846,2597
  120. Exiles in a Land of Liberty: Mormons in America, 1830-1846
    https://archive.org/details/exilesinlandofli0000winn
  121. Carthage Jail
  122. Abramson, Aldrich & Rohde 1995, p. 99.
  123. Freehling, 1991, p.437- 438: "Polk partisans called acquisition of Texas and Oregon not a southern but a western concern
  124. Freehling, 1991, p. 438: "Throughout... Midwestern states, Democrats total popular vote rose 20% between 1840 and 1844,
  125. Freehling, 1991, p. 438: "In this northwest [region], Democratic campaigners truly were the Manifest Destiny spokesmen,
  126. Freehling, 1991, p. 438: "Clay lost every state in the Deep South... but manage to hang on to the five states Harrison h
  127. John Quincy Adams and the Politics of Slavery: Selections from the Diary
    https://books.google.com/books?id=kRw1DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA293
  128. Finkelman, 2011, p. 19: "The northern Democrats could on the explicitly anti-slavery Liberty Party to...possibly siphon
  129. Wilentz, 2008, p. 574: "Had only a modest proportion of the Liberty Party's New York vote...gone instead to the Whigs, H
  130. Holt, 2005, p. 11-12
  131. Donald T. Critchlow. American Political History: A Very Short Introduction (2015) p.46.
  132. Robert L. Schuyler, "Polk and the Oregon Compromise of 1846." Political Science Quarterly 26.3 (1911): 443-461 online.
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2140965.pdf
  133. HathiTrust
    https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044100178425&view=1up&seq=139
  134. Frelinghuysen's home state was apparently New York in 1844. See The Journal of the Senate for February 12, 1845. Also no
    http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsj&fileName=036/llsj036.db&recNum=162&itemLink=D?hlaw:1:./temp/~ammem_GDSi::%230360163&linkText=1
Image
Source:
Tip: Wheel or +/− to zoom, drag to pan, Esc to close.