Anti-Imperialist Party National Convention, 1900

Origins of the Anti-Imperialist League

The Anti-Imperialist League was formed in 1898 to lobby against the annexation of the Philippines from Spain during the Spanish-American War. Former Gov. George S. Boutwell of Massachusetts served as President of the League from its inception until his death in 1905. The League adopted an official communication to President McKinley that was delivered to him on 11/25/1898 [New York Times, 11/26/1898]. Former Secretary of State John Sherman responded to the League in a letter in which he stated that he hoped that the Philippines would become an independent nation, free of all foreign control [New York Times, 12/8/1898]. The same day that the League received the letter, it appointed several prominent men as Vice Presidents in an attempt to expand its sphere of influence. Among its VPs were former Pres. Grover Cleveland, Andrew Carnegie, Charles F. Adams, Carl Schurz, John G. Carlisle, and Gov. Pingree of Michigan [NYT 12/13/1898]. A later convert to the League was Sen. George F. Hoar, who helped organize the opposition in the Senate to the peace treaty signed with Spain [NYT 3/31/1899]. On 5/23/1899, the League added several other VPs, including Donelson Caffery LA, W. Bourke Cochran NY, Leland Stanford Jr., Gov. Andrew E. Lee SD, and several college presidents [NYT 5/24/1899]. Throughout 1899, the League established local affiliates to lobby locally for their programs [NYT 8/3/1899].

The League called a meeting that met in the Plaza Hotel in New York City on 6/25/1900. It was attended by Silver Republicans, Gold Democrats, and several independents. The League hoped to gather a sense of the political situation and to assess its options for helping defeat President McKinley. Many delegates had already endorsed William J. Bryan for President and did not want to have a third major ticket in the field. In the end, however, the gathering decided to call a "Liberty Congress" of anti-imperialists to meet after the Democratic National Convention [NYT 6/26/1900]. An open invitation for delegates to appear was issued on 7/23/00 [NYT 7/24/1900].

Anti-Imperialist Party National Convention, 1900
Temporary Chairman	Permanent Chairman	Presidential Nominee	VP Nominee
Edwin B. Smith IL	Former Gov. George S. Boutwell MA	Former U.S. Rep. William J. Bryan NE	Former Vice President Adlai E. Stevenson CA

The Anti-Imperialist Party National Convention assembled in Tomlinson Hall, Indianapolis IN, 11:00 a.m., 8/15/1900 for a two-day convention. The hall was set up for 600 delegates. Behind the stage were large images of Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Oliver P. Morton. At the time the convention met, the delegates were divided over whether to nominate Bryan or introduce a third ticket. The day the convention assembled, the State Department released information that one of the delegates had been in correspondence with the Philippine resistance [NYT 8/14-16/1900].

When the convention assembled, Edwin Burritt Smith of Chicago was appointed the temporary chairman. There were 300 delegates on the floor. A.H. Tolman, a professor at the University of Chicago, read the Declaration of Independence, followed by a prayer by Herbert S. Bigelow of Cincinnati. Smith gave a short address in which he outlined that independent voters had been able to sway each of the previous six presidential elections.

The afternoon session began at 2:30 p.m. Chairman Smith called on delegates to give short speeches. General John Beatty of Columbus OH stated that he had always been a Republican and hoped that God would forgive him for voting for McKinley in 1896. His statement brought a great demonstration on the floor. Some delegates called for the nomination of William J. Bryan. Former Gov. Boutwell was appointed the permanent chairman. Boutwell gave a lengthy address to the delegates. Then a resolutions committee was appointed. During an evening session, the delegates were entertained with speeches. [NYT 8/16/1900].

A group called the Nationalist Independents were meeting at the same time in Indianapolis. They were looking for an opportunity to place a third major ticket in the field and wondered if they could do so with the assistance of the Anti-Imperialists [NYT 8/16/1900].

The proposed platform set forth the League's opposition to imperialism. A heated debate took place over a plank calling for the nomination of Bryan and Stevenson. Thomas M. Osborne, a delegate from Auburn NY who wanted to have a third major ticket, led the opposition. The strength of the minority was not reflected in the voice vote, in which only a dozen delegates supported Osborne. One of the leaders of the proposed platform was a delegate named Franklin Pierce from New York State (relationship to the President not stated). Since the nominations were included in the resolutions, Bryan and Stevenson were declared the nominees, and the third party men left to discuss their situation separately. Following some minor business items, the convention adjourned sine die [NYT 8/17/1900].

Campaign

The Anti-Imperialist League drafted an address to the voters on 8/21/00 calling on them to bring an end to the military actions in the Philippines. The Bryan campaign tried to distance himself from the League, since its popular support appeared to be waning as the election neared [NYT 8/22/1900]. For some unknown reason, the Anti-Imperialist Party in Connecticut nominated a slate of Presidential Electors pledged to Leonard W. Bacon. After Bryan's defeat, the national committee met in Boston on 11/13/00 and issued an address that it intended to continue lobbying for its causes [NYT 11/14/1900]. The committee remained active as long as Gov. Boutwell lived.

Popular Vote of 1900

Electoral Vote of 1900

Dewey-Stassen Primary Debate, 1948

The Dewey-Stassen debate on 5/17/1948 just before the critical Oregon primary was the first modern presidential debate. It was the only debate planned to discuss a single issue, though some later debates were dominated by single issues. The debate was held just before the last contested presidential primary of 1948.

Background

In 1948, several leading Republicans entered the fray to challenge President Truman. Likely nominees included Stassen, Warren, Taft, Dewey, and Vandenberg. The first major test for the candidates was the Wisconsin primary on 4/6/1948, where Stassen and Dewey faced Gen. MacArthur. A key issue in the Wisconsin campaign was how to deal with the Communist Party in the United States. Stassen wanted it to be outlawed due to its subversive and treasonous nature. Dewey argued that it should be kept "out in the open, where we can beat them" rather than driving them underground. [NYT 4/3/1948].

The first mention of a debate between Dewey and Stassen came just after Stassen lost the Ohio primary to Taft on 5/4/1948. A Minneapolis newspaper stated that Dewey had challenged Stassen to a debate in Oregon (the next and final contested primary). In a series of campaign appearances in Bend OR and Portland OR on 5/8/1948, Dewey denied that he had challenged Stassen to a debate. He charged that Stassen was trying to find a reason to bypass the voluntary restriction of only making two campaign swings through contested primary states [NYT 5/9/1948].

With the idea in the air, Peter H. Odegard, president of Reed College in Portland, invited the two candidates to hold a radio debate. Both candidates immediately accepted. Dewey recommended the topic, "Shall the Communist Party be outlawed?" [NYT 5/11/1948]

At the time of Odegard's offer, Stassen was campaigning in Winston-Salem NC. He cancelled plans to campaign in Alabama and instead took a nonstop flight to Oregon so he could help make the debate arrangements. Upon landing, Stassen gave a fiery speech defending his position on Communism. [NYT 5/13/1948]

The debate almost didn't happen. Stassen quickly found that his campaign had attracted a large number of volunteers who were campaigning on his behalf. By contrast, Dewey had few volunteers and depended heavily on newspaper and radio advertising. Stassen's campaign started to drag its feet on the arrangements. Dewey's campaign complained that Stassen now thought he could win without the debate and had decided against it [NYT 5/14/1948]. The tactic achieved its intended effect, as the following day Stassen acceded to each of Dewey's proposed debate guidelines [NYT 5/15/1948]. Although only 12 delegates were at stake in Oregon, the debate was acknowledged as critical to the chances of either contender.

AP photo of debate, showing (L to R) Stassen's assistant, Stassen, Boskirk (the local Republican leader), and Dewey addressing the audience.

Debate Quick Facts

When: 6:00 to 7:00 Pacific Time, 5/17/1948 (Eastern Standard time was observing daylight savings and was the equivalent of 10 to 11 p.m.)

Where: produced by KEX, the ABC radio affiliate in Portland OR; carried on the MBS and NBC networks but not CBS

Moderator: Donald R. Van Boskirk (chairman of the Multnomah County Republican Central Committee)

Estimated audience: 40,000,000

Topic: Shall the Communist Party be outlawed?

Format: Stassen gave the affirmative response for 20 minutes, follwed by the negative by Dewey for 20 minutes. Stassen gave an 8.5 minute rebuttal, followed by an 8.5 minute rebuttal from Dewey.

Audio of entire debate: https://urresearch.rochester.edu/handle/1802/2134

Setting: Two tables were set up in front of a large banner reading "KEX." Gov. Stassen sat behind the left table with an assistant; Gov. Dewey sat behind the right table with Boskirk. When speaking, the candidates stood at a small podium at the end of the table. Four rows of chairs were arranged facing the tables, at which the "non-writing" press sat (publishers and columnists) while the "active" press sat behind a glass wall on seats arranged in five tiers. Altogether, 56 reporters sat behind the glass wall, some bringing their own typewriters with them.

Gov. Stassen brought a satchel full of reports and news articles that he arranged on the table in front of him. Gov. Dewey brought a small handful of papers that he kept stacked in front of him on the table.

Stassen spoke first. He outlined the reasons for supporting a bill introduced by Sen. Mundt (R-SD) calling for outlawing the Communist Party. He pointed out that the recent Communist coup d'etat in Czechoslovakia was directed by Moscow but could have been prevented if the previously neutral nation had outlawed the Communists. "It seems clear to me that the free countries, including America, do not now have adequate laws to safeguard themselves in the face of this menace." Stassen stated that one-fourth of all American communists lived in Gov. Dewey's state of New York. He believed that Dewey underestimated the infiltration of communists into the nation and that the removal of communists was an important step towards averting war with the Soviet Union. He finished with four questions regarding communism in the USA for Dewey to answer.

In his response, Dewey set forth the argument that the step Stassen called for would lead to totalitarianism here in the United States and that it was futile to try to outlaw ideas. Furthermore, Sen. Mundt specifically stated that his bill would not outlaw the Communist Party, as Stassen continued to state. Some of Stassen's evidence was drawn from a US Communist Party leader, "not a very good authority." He quoted Sen. Mundt who had stated "this bill does not outlaw the Communist Party." Dewey stated that the USA was involved in "a war of ideas in the world... a conflict between two wholly different ways of life." Rather than infringing upon the rights of Americans, Dewey argued that a stronger enforcement of the 27 laws against treasonous activities already on the books would suffice. Stassen was calling for an infringement upon the Constitution and Bill of Rights that would "advance the cause of communism rapidly both in this country and all over the world." He called Stassen's proposal immoral and totalitarian, not an "American" solution. "This glib proposal to outlaw the Communist Party would be quickly recognized everywhere as an abject surrender by the great United States to the methods of totalitarianism." Other nations had previously tried to outlaw the Communist Party, including Canada, which repealed the law after just five years because it took too many public employees to enforce the law it. [NYT 5/18/1948]

Stassen repeated many of his leading facts in his rebuttal. Dewey's rebuttal revolved around the fact that Mundt called for the registration of Communists, not the banning of the party. He said that Stassen had "surrendered" to his (Dewey's) position by continuing to advocate the Mundt Bill.

Result of debate

Most observers believed that the candidates both performed well. The voters of Oregon apparently preferred Dewey's position, as he won the primary by a 52-48% margin.

Note: William Z. Foster of the Communist Party asked for equal time to set forth his party's views on the Dewey-Stassen debate. MBS set up a debate between Foster and Norman Thomas, the Socialist Party candidate for President. Foster refused to hold a joint debate with Thomas, so MBS backed out. The other radio stations similarly declined to offer Foster air time [NYT 5/19-20/1948].

Popular Vote of 1828

The presidential election of 1828 was a turning point in American political history. It marked the end of the caucus system that dominated national presidential politics for the first quarter of the century but preceded the introduction of the national nominating convention. It was the last presidential election in American history with no national nomination event; none was needed, since the two top finishers of 1824 immediately began to maneuver for the 1828 election. President John Quincy Adams’s balanced and visionary administration was hampered by the charge of a "corrupt bargain" raised by his 1824 opponent, Andrew Jackson (though Jackson originally crafted the plan for himself). The Jackson campaign initiated bitter attacks upon Adams, precipitating the nastiest presidential election since 1800.

The JQA Administration

In case anyone had not noticed, the "era of good feelings" had ended. By the time JQA was inaugurated as the sixth president (3/4/1825), he was aware of the difficulty his administration faced. VP Calhoun and U.S. Sen. Martin Van Buren (DR-NY) organized the anti-administration forces in the Senate. They and U.S. Rep. George Kremer, who coined the oft-repeated phrase "corrupt bargain," charged continuously that political intrigue had overturned the will of the people and elected JQA. Adams’s hopes to establish a national university, a national observatory, and federal support for the arts and sciences came to naught.

Andrew Jackson immediately started laying the groundwork for the 1828 election. The Tennessee legislature nominated him for president on 10/7/1825 [National Intelligencer, 11/1/1825] by adopting a document named the "Preamble and Resolution." Jackson then resigned from the Senate, assuring the legislature he had not used his office as a means of "intriguing for the Presidential chair." He endorsed a constitutional amendment to allow the election of a president by a plurality of the electoral vote and said that if elected, he would not appoint members of Congress to his Cabinet. (McCormick, p. 120)

During the 19th Congress, the two houses debated how the president should be chosen. Jackson supporters sponsored his proposed amendment allowing a plurality choice, while others advocated the district mode. While the term "popular vote" to describe non-legislative selection of Presidential Electors had been used on occasion in the past [for example, in the New-Hampshire Gazette, 11/17/1801], the term "the popular vote" apparently was first used on the floor of Congress by U.S. Rep. George McDuffie of South Carolina. In a famous speech (reported in the Richmond Enquirer on 3/2/1826), McDuffie referred on occasion to "the" popular vote as a means of designating the selection of Presidential Electors by the people. When the proposed Jackson amendment failed by a vote of 90-102, several states responded by shifting their mode of choosing the Electors to the General Ticket in order to maximize their influence in 1828.

The Midterm Election of 1826-1827

Jackson supporters started the United States Telegraph in 1826 in Washington to provide a nationwide partisan press (no relation to the 1844 invention called the telegraph). Editorials in the paper were carried in local Jackson newspapers around the nation. For the most part, the midterm election was not a referendum on the Adams administration. In many states, the old fault lines remained in place – in CT, three factions nominated a slate of candidates, while in NH the state DRP nominated a slate of U.S. House candidates that ran practically unopposed. Major contests appeared in NJ, NY, and OH; the Administration slate swept NJ, won a majority in Ohio, and slightly failed of a majority in NY. Overall, the Jackson party gained seven U.S. House seats – enough for control.

In early 1827, some Jackson supporters decided to collect the election statistics for 1824. They contacted newspapers in each state in which the Presidential Electors were chosen by the people and produced a table showing that Jackson had been the choice of the people in 1824. This first attempt was fraught with irregularities but was substantially accurate. It showed not only that Jackson had placed first, but that his vote (41%) was about the same as the sum of that for Adams (32%) and Clay (13%). When U.S. Rep. John C. Wright of OH gave a speech in the House in early 1828, he described the "popular vote" as the nationwide sum of the votes for Presidential Electors and thus established the current usage.

The Campaign of 1828

One development of 1828 was the increased number of state conventions called to nominate slates of Presidential Electors. Such conventions had been held on occasion in earlier elections, but now became universal replacements for state caucuses. The Administration’s Pennsylvania state convention (1/4/1828) nominated JQA for a second term and Gov. John A. Schulze for VP; the latter declined to run, so the convention nominated US Treasury Secy. Richard Rush [Pittsfield Sun, 1/24/1828]. Rush was then endorsed by NRP conventions in Virginia on 1/12 [Cooperstown NY newspaper The Watch-Tower, 1/28/1828] and Maine on 1/23 [Essex Gazette, 2/2/1828] and completed the national ticket (bumping sitting VP Calhoun). The Pennsylvania Jackson convention nominated a slate of Jackson-Calhoun Electors on 1/8/1828 as a means of locking the sitting VP into the team [New-Hampshire Sentinel, 1/25/1828]. The Jackson-Calhoun ticket was then endorsed by other state Jackson conventions, though not unanimously; the Virginia convention nominated Calhoun for VP with 164 votes to 20 for Nathaniel Macon and 5 scattering [Baltimore Patriot, 1/18/1828].

Jackson rang in the presidential campaign season of 1828 with a visit to New Orleans on 1/8/1828, the 13th anniversary of the battle. The Louisiana legislature (which reluctantly supported him in 1824) organized a four-day event in his honor. Jackson left home in late 12/1827 and travelled by steamboat; he stopped first at Natchez and arrived in New Orleans on 1/8. He was careful to avoid political speeches and received positive nationwide press bringing his victory there back into the remembrance of the voters.

The Jackson campaign believed that a direct appeal to the people would result in his landslide victory. It therefore organized mass rallies throughout the nation with associated barbecues, parades with large banners, local Jackson Clubs, and the raising of "Hickory poles." Jackson ended his policy of issuing letters outlining his positions. After drafting the first of such letters for 1828, his campaign team unanimously objected – John H. Eaton, Van Buren, and James Knox Polk. Eaton’s advice was "Be still – Be at home." Van Buren wrote "Our people do not like to see publications from candidates." Throughout the campaign, Jackson issued one letter on the tariff in response to a question by the legislature of Indiana and one to deny charges that he had participated in the Aaron Burr conspiracy.

The Jackson press initiated a vitriolic attack on President Adams. In addition to being involved in the "corrupt bargain" of 1825, Adams had purchased a billiard table so he could gamble in the White House. He was also charged with seeking to institute a monarchy. The Jackson campaign, however, had opened a door that could not be closed. Charles Hammond, editor of the Cincinnati Gazette, called Jackson an adulterer because he had married a divorcee (in a time when the biblical injunction was taken seriously). John Binns of Philadelphia issued the famous "coffin handbill," which illustrated Jackson’s decision to execute eight militia men under his military command who wanted out. Jackson objected to the "base calumnies" of the Administration press but didn’t seem to notice the scurrilous charges promulgated by his own campaign.

Casting the Popular Vote

The popular vote was cast in the various states in a three-week window, beginning on 10/31/1828 in Ohio and Pennsylvania and ending with four states voting on 11/19/1828. When the voting began, Jackson had certain states worth 109 electoral votes plus four leaning states and half of MD and NY for an additional 43 electoral votes (109+43=152). Adams had six firm states with 45 electoral votes and was leading in four states plus half of NY and MD (45+67=112). With 131 being a majority, Adams needed to take 19 electoral votes from Jackson to win.

The first two states were Pennsylvania and Ohio. The inexplicable attraction of the former state to Andrew Jackson resulted in a minimal Adams effort there – but Ohio was hotly contested. On election day, voter turnout in these two states tripled from 96,000 in 1824 to 283,000. Pennsylvania voted as expected, though Jackson’s margin of victory fell from 76% (1824) to 67%. It was the first time in US History that a presidential candidate won more than 100,000 votes in a single state (breaking the earlier record of 50,000 given to DeWitt Clinton by Massachusetts in 1812). In Ohio, Jackson pulled off a 51-48% win – taking the state out of the "leaning Adams" column and making it very difficult for Adams to be re-elected. The status: Jackson 122+43=165; Adams 45+51=96.

Nine states voted on 11/3/1828: CT, GA, IL, ME, MA, MO, NH, NY, and VA. Turnout was even more pronounced – it increased fourfold from 97,000 in these states to 493,000. The phenomenal turnout of this one day far surpassed the 364,000 nationwide turnout in 1824 and was at the time the largest number of votes cast on a single day in American history. Nationwide, Jackson led in the day’s popular votes with 248,000 to Adams’s 241,000 (and 5,000 scattering in New England). The big prize of the day was New York, where Jackson won a narrow 8,000 majority out of 270,000 votes cast and set a new record for the most votes cast for a candidate in a single state (139,000). The state’s electoral vote was allocated by district, and Jackson won 20 Electors to 16 for Adams. Jackson won the two contested states of IL and MO, and the other states voted as expected. Altogether, Jackson won 60 electoral votes to 55 for Adams. While the margin was close, it put Jackson over the 131 needed to win. The status: Jackson 149+15=164; Adams 69+24=93. Even if Adams won all close states remaining, he would lose nationwide by 149-108.

The next clump of states voted between 11/4 and 11/14. These seven states – AL, IN, MS, NJ, NC, TN, and VT– offered only two contests. By the time these states were voting, news of the earlier races was trickling down through newspapers. New Jersey voted on the 4th and 5th before the results from the 3d were known; turnout doubled from 1824, but this time Adams won a 52-48% victory to snag it from the "leaning Jackson" column. The other contested state was Indiana. Adams expected to be competitive with Clay’s support, but Jackson won a 56-43% victory. The status: Jackson 154+6=160; Adams 77+24=101.

In the last four states, voting on 11/19, turnout increased from 58,000 to 129,000 even though it was already known that Jackson had won the election. Of the three, only Rhode Island leaned heavily to either candidate. While in 1824 the results of earlier states helped Adams, in 1828 they helped Jackson. Jackson won the battleground states of KY and LA; Adams received more votes in MD (along with 6 of the 11 Electors).

The result of the election was a Jackson victory with 56% of the vote. Over one million people voted, three times the turnout of 1824. They chose 167 Jackson Electors to 80 Adams Electors; South Carolina and Delaware chose Electors by their legislatures. The result was substantially a repeat of the 1800 election, with the Federalist states of 1800 mostly lining up behind JQA in 1828 and the Jefferson states of 1800 primarily supporting Jackson.

Key source: The Presidential Game, pp. 120-152

Electoral Vote of 1828