By Andrew Zonderman
In the middle of the eighteenth century, Maryland’s major crops shifted from tobacco to grains, and the state’s population became more diversified. These changes in agriculture and population eventually led in the next century to political divisions between northern and western counties on one side, and southern and eastern counties on the other. In turn, these political debates shaped the state’s response to the growing sectional crisis of the 1850s.
Maryland’s political divisions started in the late 1600’s when tobacco was introduced from Virginia. Tobacco became an instant success for coastal farmers because the soil was ideal for its growth, and demand from the West Indies, France, and England made the price high. With money made from the tobacco trade Maryland became one of the wealthiest colonies, and built great roads and public buildings. With the growing demand for tobacco, there was also an increase in the need for labor. Indentured servants were becoming hard to find, and once they had worked out their contracts they would become competitors in the market. By 1700, slavery became a more cost-effective choice for tobacco planters. Hundreds of slaves were brought overland from the Triangle Trade.
Tobacco cultivation declined in the 1740s as the Chesapeake soil started to become less productive. Meanwhile the Carolinas and Georgia started to grow more of the leafy cash crop on their plantations. Also demand from Europe and the West Indies slowly decreased which lowered the price, and Maryland started to put heavy taxes on tobacco. Tobacco farmers wanted to know what they were to grow. The answer came from Europe.
Europe, with its constant wars and large cities, needed an increasing amount of grains, particularly wheat. Maryland farmers soon found out that their tired soil could bring in a bountiful harvest of wheat. The wheat crop needs far less care than tobacco, so the demand for slave labor declined. Slavery was also becoming less popular because of the large influx of Pennsylvanian Germans into northern and western Maryland where most wheat was grown. These immigrants often worked as hired field hands during harvest time. Most of these immigrants were too poor to own slaves and many had objections to owning slaves since slavery was unknown in Germany. Slaves were also becoming harder to buy because there was more demand in the lower South. Even with all these difficulties and disadvantages, farmers in southern Maryland still planted tobacco.1 Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground, pp.4-6.
By the late eighteenth century, Maryland showed a steady decrease in the number of slaves bought and kept. Maryland also had a steady increase in the number of free blacks. Most of these free blacks settled on small farms or in cities like Baltimore and Fredricksburg.
After the Revolutionary War, Maryland started to split geographically and the state’s government would be so divided until the end of the Civil War. Each region had certain agricultural and economic characteristics that made their political goals different than the other’s. Northern and western counties grew almost entirely grains on small farms with very few slaves. Most of the free blacks in the state lived in this region’s towns and cities. Almost every factory and school was in this region as well as the urban population around Baltimore.
The eastern region was home to large farms and plantations that grew tobacco and grains. There were many slaves in the region and some free blacks. However, the region’s goal was to end its isolation caused by a lack of communication with the rest of the state. Only a small strip of land connected the eastern counties to the rest of the state. Poor roads and a lack of naval transportation plagued the region. Since the eastern region had slavery, easterners tended to side with the south on most issues except those dealing with internal improvements.
The southern region was just like the Deep South. It grew tobacco and almost every farm was a plantation. The region had the majority of slaves in the state; in fact the population was 55% white and 45% black. Free blacks were almost nowhere to be found because of white suspicions of a slave revolt; free blacks couldn’t find a job in the region.
These sectional differences would grow worse in the 1850’s. In the early 1850’s, Maryland politics were dominated by the Whigs and the Democrats. The Whigs held a majority of the legislative seats in the southern part of the state, they controlled the House of Delegates, and had a slim majority in the Senate. The Democrats were popular in the western and northern parts of the state. They were the minority in both legislative houses, and their goal was to try and redistrict the state to gain more power. The eastern part of the state was almost split, with a slight advantage for the Whigs. Since the east had more plantation agriculture like the south, easterners tended to side with southerners on issues related to slavery.2 Maryland’s Persistent Pursuit to End Slavery 1850-1864, p.365.
In 1850, the Whigs in the northern and western parts of the state and the Democrats decided to have a constitutional convention on the grounds that the state hadn’t had one in 14 years and needed to be redistricted. However the proposition met strong opposition, especially from the Whigs in the south and east, who feared that the growing northern and western counties would soon control the legislative branch and the rest of the state’s politics. The vote in the House of Delegates was 43 to 35 in favor of the convention. The state’s southern delegates voted against it, but surprisingly most of the eastern region’s delegates voted in favor of the convention.3 Maryland’s Persistent Pursuit to End Slavery 1850-1864, p.367.
The Constitutional Convention of 1850 started on November 4th in the capital, Annapolis. The Whigs had seats for 25 delegates from the south, 19 from the east, and 11 from the north and west. The Democrats had 3 from the south, 17 from the east, and 28 from the north and west. The first issue of redistricting was to change the number of representatives in the House of Delegates from 78 to 73. The bill passed 42 to 30, receiving full Democrat support and a few Whig votes. Next the south and east showed their power by changing the state’s senatorial districts to one for each county and one for Baltimore. This change helped the south and east greatly since the south had six counties and the east had eight, while the north and west would have only eight with the inclusion of Baltimore. The change passed by a vote of 58 to 35. The vote was completely sectional with almost no support for the change from the north or west. The convention ended and then it was up to the people to decide whether they would approve the redistricting plan.4 Maryland’s Persistent Pursuit to End Slavery 1850-1864, p.371.
Like the convention itself, the popular vote was divided along regional lines. None of the six southern counties came close to passing the changes. In the east, six of the eight counties passed the changes; and all seven northern and western counties passed the new constitution. The final result of the popular vote was 29,016 to18,584 in favor of the changes. The Whigs in Maryland would never again control the state’s government like they had before the Constitutional Convention of 1850 plan.5 Maryland’s Persistent Pursuit to End Slavery 1850-1864, p. 374.
Maryland politics changed dramatically in the late 1850’s with the death of the Whig party. Southern Whigs usually became Democrats, while in the northern counties, most Whigs joined the Know Nothing party, and the radicals joined the Free Soilers and a few years later, the Republicans.
The Know-Nothings became the dominant party of the northern and western part of the state. In fact, from 1854 to 1858, they dominated the state’s politics. The economy had cooled slightly and there was an increase of immigration, which produced just what the Know-Nothings wanted: anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic sentiment, especially in Baltimore. There was one more factor that would help the new party to create an urban political machine: the fire squads.
Since
Baltimore had become a large industrial city it had a problem with its
independent fire squads who fought with each other to see who could collect the
most money. Fights broke out over the
use of water plugs, so the fire companies would often hire gangs to guard water
plugs so that they alone could put out the fire. Groups of supporters for different squads would come to see if
their squad was able to put out the fire.
Some of these supporters would carry sticks, knives, or even guns, which
often led to riots. “Efforts to curb by
law the practice of running after the engine companies were without much
effect, except the boomerang one, in this case, of leading to the arrest of
several of the firefighters themselves.
The severity of the fire had brought out a second engine company,
operating outside its district in technical violation of the law.” 6 Slavery
and Freedom on the Middle Ground, p.46.
The Know-Nothings often used fire gangs to watch ballots at the polls. In these days of open voting, if someone brought up an opposing ballot the thugs would refuse to let him in, threaten him, or in the worst cases, beat him. With the gangs in action, very few Germans in Baltimore or the surrounding towns voted from 1854 to 1858. After the local and state elections of 1854, the Know-Nothings took 12 seats in the House of Delegates and several mayoral races including Baltimore. Also Maryland was the only state that voted for the Know-Nothing’s candidate, the former president Millard Filmore, in the 1856 national election.
Southern and eastern Marylanders were horrified at this result. They were a more aristocratic society and were shocked by the mob violence of the cities and the gangs who patrolled the polls. Southerners and easterners also feared the Know-Nothings’ indifference to slavery, because the new party might pass anti-slavery legislation. 7 Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground, p.58-59.
The peak of Maryland’s Know-Nothing gang violence was the election riot of 1857. The riot started on election morning when one of the fire company gangs, the Plug Uglies, took the early morning train from Baltimore to Washington, D.C. The Plug Uglies chose a few polling places to intimidate voters and beat up immigrants especially Irishmen. A few voters stood up against the gang and fought back; some local Know-Nothings joined the gang’s destruction at the polls. The mayor, who was walking a few blocks away, arrived with a group of policemen and tried to calm the mob. President Buchanan was told of the situation. He called for soldiers to quell the disturbance, but was told that there were only around 100 marines that could be summoned fast enough. The next closest force was an artillery company at Fort McHenry. The marines assembled and marched to the riot, where they were surprised to find a group of teenagers and men standing around an old cannon loaded with debris aimed at them. The commander of the marines stood right in front of the cannon and ordered the mob not to fire. The marines then formed three sides of a rectangle and fired on the crowd. The mob pulled back but did not retreat. After the volley the marines quickly fixed their bayonets and charged the mob. The Plug Uglies ran to the train station where there was a train waiting with the marines close on their heels. After the Plug Uglies left, the polls were set up again and by early afternoon voting has resumed.8 American History pp.56-64.
The next major political event to further divide Maryland was the election of 1860. Baltimore was now a politically important city located between the far North and the deep South. The second Democratic convention was held there and the Constitutional Union Party’s convention where Speaker of the House John C. Bell of Tennessee was nominated.
Abraham Lincoln was the Republican candidate from Illinois who had recently gained fame from the Lincoln-Douglas debates. He stood for limiting slavery in the territories. He was popular in the northern states and especially among abolitionists. The South hated him, and in most southern states he didn’t even get enough support to be on the ballot.
Stephen Douglas was the Northern Democrats’ candidate from Illinois. With the death of Calhoun and Clay, Douglas became one of the most influential men in Washington. He stood for popular sovereignty in the territories. He was extremely popular in the West, and received many votes throughout the rest of the country.
John C. Breckinridge was the candidate for the Southern Democrats. He was from Kentucky. His platform was the preservation and expansion of slavery. This stand made him extremely popular in the South, but he received almost no support from the North.
Bell was the Constitutional Unionist candidate from Tennessee. He stood for a compromise on slavery and the preservation of the union. Bell was popular in the states that border the North and South, including Maryland.
With four candidates Maryland’s voters had many choices, but again regional differences showed. In the northern and western part of the state the large number of immigrants voted for Bell, while radicals voted for Lincoln. Conservatives in the region voted for Douglas or Breckinridge. In the south and east most voters went with Breckinridge, moderates with either Douglas or Bell, and again radicals with Lincoln.
The results in Maryland were extremely close.
Breckinridge took Maryland’s electoral votes with 42,497 votes. Second with
41,777 votes was Bell. Douglas won only 5,873 votes. Lincoln was last with of 2,294 votes.
Looking at the election of 1860, Marylanders clearly did not want to destroy slavery since the southern and eastern regions used slave labor to produce important crops. Once again the eastern and southern regions showed their combined power by supporting Breckenridge. However, the large vote for Bell demonstrated that many voters in the state felt the Union was important and slavery might have to be compromised in order to preserve the nation. And, in fact, when the country was torn apart, Maryland’s state senate voted unanimously that the state had no right to secede from the Union. Thus, Maryland continued to wrestle with the problems of slavery and Civil War in a deeply divided state.9 Maryland and the Civil War, p.21.
Ackerman,
S.J. “Riot in Washington,” American History, June 2001: 56-64.
Denton, Lawrence. Southern Star for Maryland. Baltimore: Publishing Concepts, 1995.
Fields, Barbara Jeanne. Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985.
Fuke, Richard Paul. Imperfect Equality. New York: Fordham University Press, 1999.
Guy, Anita Aidt. Maryland’s Persistent Pursuit to End Slavery. New York: Garland Publishing, 1997.
Manakee, Harold. Maryland in the Civil War. Baltimore: Maryland Historic Society, 1961.
“History of Maryland.” Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia Redmond, WA, 1999.