The Politics of Long Division: The Birth of the Second Party System in Ohio, 1818-1828

The Politics of Long Division: The Birth of the Second Party System in Ohio, 1818-1828. By Donald J. Ratcliffe. (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2000. Pp. xvii, 455. $65.00.) A number of scholars, including Eugene H. Roseboom, Francis P. Weisenburger, Andrew Cayton, Daniel Feller, and others, have shown that Ohio both reflected and helped shape the second party system. Settled by diverse pioneers, Ohio quickly evolved from a frontier community into a populous farming and small manufacturing society that played a major role in the nation's economy and political culture. Donald J. Ratcliffe's new volume, The Politics of Long Division, now carries forward the analysis of these developments that he began in his 1998 book, Party Spirit in a Frontier Republic. This book is complex, since it deals with the evolution of a new and competitive party system in a state with numerous local political leaders. Like other frontier states, Ohio grew very quickly immediately after the War of 1812. This boom, built upon a base of easy credit, was followed by a devastating collapse, which, as Ratcliffe notes, was particularly intense and long-lasting in the Cincinnati region. Hard times strained the state's social system, leading many voters and potential voters to worry about growing economic inequality and corruption among entrenched political leaders. To varying degrees, voters feared that Ohio's future was threatened both by hostile northeastern political leaders and by the aggressive expansion of southern plantation slavery. Ohio had an intensely competitive political system well before the Panic of 1819, with ambitious men competing in each country for numerous local offices amidst frequent elections. As the older labels Jeffersonian and Federalist faded in many regions, local leaders began to declare their allegiance to new candidates for the presidency, partly from personal preference, but also because they wanted to align with winners. For many Ohioans, the solution to the state's troubles lay in national measures. They became western sectionalists, arguing that frontier states must use their political strength to force easier land terms from the federal government, achieve protective tariffs that would shield western wool from import competition, and obtain federal funding for highways, canals, and harbor improvements. After winning more favorable land terms, however, these Ohioans began to support rival candidates. Some preferred Henry Clay, whose American System sought tariffs and improvements. Others hated Clay, particularly in southwestern Ohio, where he was known largely for serving as legal representative of the Bank of the United States in foreclosures. Many men originally preferred DeWitt Clinton as a candidate, but when he seemed uninterested, some gave their allegiance to John Quincy Adams. Adams was not considered a friend to internal improvements, but he was seen as opposed to the expansion of slavery, and former New Englanders favored him for what were essentially ethnocultural reasons. Ratcliffe notes that in deciding between Clay and Adams, many Ohioans were choosing between a western self-identity and a northern one. Finally, many Ohioans preferred Andrew Jackson. He was clearly a frontiersman, and after the War of 1812, he was regarded as a patriot immune from the corruption of the capitol. Jackson also was seen as friendly to transportation improvements. While many Ohioans feared his temper, military background, and status as a large slave owner, others found him an ideal candidate. Ratcliffe notes that throughout 1824, local politicians or editors who were losing power in their countries swung behind Jackson, partly because he enjoyed growing support and could be a winner. After the election of 1824 and political agreements between Adams and Clay, Ratcliffe observes, Jacksonians and Adamsites continued to organize. …