If you think today's politics are getting a bit crazy . . . well, they are, but it's not the first time. Two hundred years ago, the election of 1824 was dramatic in a way that hasn't been repeated since.
To start with, voters chose between four candidates, who were all nominally part of the same party. The Federalists had faded into obscurity, so everyone was a Democratic-Republican, with neither of those words meaning exactly what we mean when we use them.
 |
Andrew Jackson
|
Andrew Jackson, famous for his victory at New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812, put himself forward as the "common man" choice, and voters have proved time and again that they love a good war hero. He was bombastic and authoritarian. (There's a reason you see articles claiming that Trump is bringing back Jacksonian politics.) Jackson did win the popular vote, though that is misleading because not all states selected electors through popular vote in 1824. He did not have enough electoral votes to win.
As another side note - I feel like this article might have lots of side notes. That big win in Louisiana? It actually happened AFTER the treaty was signed to end the war. However, thanks to slow moving news, the two events seemed to occur at the same time and give the public the impression that Jackson had won the war.
 |
John Quincy Adams
|
John Quincy Adams was possibly the greatest statesman of that day or any since - seriously, the man started working for the ambassador to Russia at 14 and served the country until he collapsed on the House floor 66 years later. He was of the old school that believed campaigning was in poor taste, a philosophy I wish more modern politicians bought into. JQA became the president when the House of Representatives selected him after no candidate received enough electoral votes. (Incidentally, Adams would have won the electoral college outright if it had not been for the 3/5 compromise then in place that gave slaveholding states a significant advantage over free states.) Unfortunately, Adams was too far ahead of his time, lobbying for national improvements and educational facilities that the American people just weren't ready to support. His failure to connect with the people the way Jackson did caused JQA's reelection campaign to fail in 1828.
 |
Henry Clay
|
Henry Clay, the Great Compromiser who kept America out of Civil War until after he died, was the third candidate. A slaveholding westerner like Jackson (Kentucky & Tennessee were considered the west then), Clay was popular but never quite grasped the presidency. A case of everyone wanting a moderate until they're given the choice of a moderate, I guess. You don't get a nickname like the Great Compromiser by being too extreme. When it was clear things wouldn't go his way, he threw his support to JQA, infuriating Jackson who called it a 'corrupt bargain.' Oh, what would these guys think of the corrupt bargains we see being made today? And, of course, Jackson made plenty of them himself once he was president.
 |
William Crawford
|
Finally, the fourth and least remembered candidate was William Crawford. He had been serving as Treasury Secretary, which is likely why James A Hamilton supported his candidacy, though he also admired Adams and Clay. In 1824, the most important issues to James were the nation's finances and strict adherence to the Constitution. James thought Crawford was 'intelligent, well informed, and scrupulously upright.' Crawford died in March 1825, so it is probably best that he didn't win.
It is ironic that James A Hamilton is often referred to as a Jacksonian for serving as that president's temporary Secretary of State and advising him throughout his presidency after Jackson had a huge revenge win (oh no, that also sounds familiar) in 1828. A more careful study of Hamilton's writing reveals that he was not a great supporter of Jackson before or after his presidency. James wrote to almost every president who served during his lifetime, offering his services and advice. Perhaps this is the kind of bipartisanship we can all learn a little bit from.
James A Hamilton believed Jackson's election 'was an event in our country of vast importance, because it violated a course of public policy which received the sanction of the wisest men of the country of all parties, from the adoption of the Constitution. He was elected only because he had been a successful soldier, not having that familiar acquaintance with public affairs which can only come from a stateman.' Jackson was 'wholly uneducated and without talent' though 'his intentions were upright, his integrity unyielding.' He also had some prime words for Jackson's cabinet, but I will save those for another day.
The election of John Quincy Adams in 1824 was controversial with some people never accepting that the result was fair or the will of the people. There truly is nothing new under the sun. It didn't stop each of these men, well other than poor Crawford who died soon afterward, from leaving their marks on history and making a difference in the formation of the United States.
If you would like to read more about Jackson, Clay, John Quincy Adams, and the drama of the early 19th century, pre-order my biography of James Alexander Hamilton, who had a unique position to observe it all.Now available for pre-order through my bookshop, Amazon UK, Waterstones.
