Election of 1824: Corruption in Presidential Elections?
Edsitement provides a very practical and useful lesson plan for teachers desiring to put current politics into historical contexts.
Controversy was to the Election of 1824 as losing to Ohio State is to Michigan–the first is ingrained into the fabric of the other. The parties involved were not above descending into the mud-slinging fray. While the Crawford and Clay camps were not noted as much for this, the Adams and Jackson groups were characterized by piling the political mud on with proverbial shovels. For example, Jackson’s wife was labeled as an adulteress by Adams’ followers, while Adams was depicted by the Jacksonites as a dainty dandy that wore silk underwear.
It was the result of the election, however, that provided the most controversial substance. There was no majority winner of electoral votes, so the election was sent to the House to decide. Clay was out of the running, as he came in fourth. Crawford died and was, understandably, out of contention. The election in the House was narrowed down to Adams and Jackson. The House swung towards Adams, allowing for the first son of a president to win that office. Soon after inauguration, House speaker Henry Clay, who had been in a unique position to determine the election’s outcome, was named as Adams’ Secretary of State. The Jacksonites cried “foul!” They leveled corruption charges at Adams and Clay.
Was there a Corrupt Bargain, as the Jackson camp claimed? This Edsitement lesson plan can help your students answer this question. Additionally, with this context in mind, teachers may be able to compare today’s politics and the extent to which they are “clean” to real historical data.