Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884

by Mark Wahlgren Summers

The presidential election of 1884, in which Grover Cleveland ended the Democrats' twenty-four-year presidential drought by defeating Republican challenger James G. Blaine, was one of the gaudiest in American history, remembered today less for its political significance than for the mudslinging and slander that characterized the campaign. But a closer look at the infamous election reveals far more complexity than previous stereotypes allowed, argues Mark Summers. Behind all the mud and malarkey, he says, lay a world of issues and consequences.

Summers suggests that both Democrats and Republicans sensed a political system breaking apart, or perhaps a new political order forming, as voters began to drift away from voting by party affiliation toward voting according to a candidate's stand on specific issues. Mudslinging, then, was done not for public entertainment but to tear away or confirm votes that seemed in doubt. Uncovering the issues that really powered the election and stripping away the myths that still surround it, Summers uses the election of 1884 to challenge many of our preconceptions about Gilded Age politics.

Genres: American History, History, Politics, 19th Century, Presidents

408 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

About the author

Mark Wahlgren Summers is Thomas D. Clark Professor of History at the University of Kentucky, Lexington.

Reviews

[Sean Chick · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is as much about the scandal ridden 1884 election, as it is about Gilded Age politics, both at its apogee and as was transforming. The analysis of the nuances of the Irish vote, prohibition, and the Mugwumps are particular stand-outs. That said, if I have any issue with the book it is a lack of discussion about the different factions among the Southern Democrats and of Grover Cleveland himself. He is present, but much of this is about James G. Blaine's actions. This is a tale in part of how the "Plumed Knight" was defeated.

It is an amusing read much of the time, filled with humor and asides, although at times too cryptic. It works as both a narrative and an analysis, and I would say does both with equal success. Summers is also fair to the participants. Even Blaine, who he much admires, comes in for criticism, Summers noting his tactical mistakes. More importantly, Blaine had few fast and hard principles. It helped make him a superb politician with a rabid fan-base, but it also opened him to attacks, and those who distrusted Blaine did so deeply.

[James · Rating 3 out of 5]

Comprehensive study of the election of 1884. I will say that I'm mystified by how inadequate his coverage was of African American politics during this period, especially since he gave such thorough coverage to other groups and issues during this time. I'm curious as to how much research he even did into black newspapers during this period. I know there's a lot out there about African Americans and the election of 1884, because, well, I wrote a chapter of my master's thesis on it. :)

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fun account of the many issues at play in the nastiest Presidential election campaign of the gilded age, and perhaps of any age thus far (up to and including the last one). Summers underestimates to my mind how significant Cleveland's election was for civil rights for African Americans (although he gets the direction right in both parties), but otherwise a solid account.

[Frank Stein · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like other Mark Summers books, this one can be a little too chatty and a little too informal, and it sometimes lacks a coherent flow. But, also like other Mark Summers books, this one is eye-opening, thoughtful, and detailed, and gives one the best look at Gilded Age politics that one can imagine.

The basic takeaway here is that the 1884 election, often derided as a election that elevated personalities over politics (with Grover Cleveland's love-child to Maria Halpin, and James Blaine's Little Rock Railroad and Guano trade dealings both being central), was actually a campaign about policies and principles. After President Rutherford Hayes's "New Departure," the South became largely lost to Republicans. In the following decade they did make alliances with groups like William Mahone's Readjusters in Virginia, or Tyre York's Liberals in North Carolina, but on the whole they had to write the Southern states out of their strategy. And this clarified some issues such as the tariff. No longer would the Democrats be dominated by the Philadelphian and arch-protectionist Speaker of the House Samuel Randall. Instead, Kentuckian Speaker Samuel Carlisle, along with Ways and Means Chair WIlliam Morrison of Illinois, would attempt true rate reductions (although their attempts at a cross-the-board 20% cut in 1883 failed miserably.) When James Blaine bucked tradition and took to the stump in Ohio to win the October congressional vote, he hit home the tariff as the main issue of the campaign.

Meanwhile, Blaine's personal peccadillos and spoils-mongering made him a ready target for the "independents," people like Carl Schurz and George William Curtis, who defected from the Republicans because Cleveland had shown himself willing to fight Tammany Hall and patronage (he was willing, with assemblyman Theodore Roosevelt, to shift some New York offices from fees to salaries, take away aldermen's confirmation power) and was willing to to ban contract labor in the state prison system and end tenement house cigar-making. He created Niagara Falls as a state park, set up a state board of claims, and made examination of insurance and bank corporations mandatory. Cleveland's self-declared platform after the nomination declared himself forthright for the Civil Service system, and this attracted a host of policy-minded reformers. Summers even shows that the Democrats, despite their Southern sympathies, were already making efforts to recruit blacks in the North. In 1881 they strengthened the New York State civil rights law, and although NJ Democratic governor Leon Abbett was a former race-baiter, in 1884 he helped enact a state civil rights law replacing the one the US Supreme Court overturned.

THere were personal attacks (and Senator George F. Edmunds of Vermont attacked Blaine and withheld support because of Blaine's veiled attacks on him in a defense of his railroad investments), issues like the Halpin affair were less cited than the tarriff, and even the infamous "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" (RRR) comment by Samuel Burchard at the specially organized New York ministers conference for Blaine, wouldn't have mattered if New York didn't end up lost to the Democrats by just 1,000 votes. But in that case, as Summers points out, every little thing could have and would have tipped the election. This is a marvelous analysis of politics and policy that should stand as the final word on the infamous election.

[Alex · Rating 2 out of 5]

A beast of political history. I'm ultimately glad I read it, but I don't know that I would opt to ever do so again unless compelled. If you are interested in the minutiae of 1880s politics, political campaigns, and the wheels that turned American government, this is a go-to text. For me, however, it was a beast. A well done beast, but a beast all the same.

[Andy Miller · Rating 2 out of 5]

The 1884 Presidential Election is one of the most interesting in our history. It was the first victory by a Democrat since the Civil War, it helped cement the "Solid South" saw interesting fissures with Mugwumps, Prohibitionists, Greenback party, and possible start of some Irish American voters drifting away from the Democratic party. The economy, especially the issues of the gold standard and tariffs were central, as was the tension between civil service and merit employment vs political patronage. And of course the famous speech where a Blaine supporting minister denounced "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" at a Blaine rally--in the presence of Blaine.
While there is some good, in depth analysis in the book, including a persuasive argument that the famous speech did not alter the election near as much as history tells us, the book disappointed me.
First, the writing itself was often too cute. While starting to make a salient point, the author would often go off on a tangent wjth a random quote or an attempt at a witty analogy, that seemed to have less to do with the point than with the author wanting to appear to be erudite and funny.
Second, the author was snarky throughout the book and mainly at people trying to make our politics better, to make our country better. While acknowledging the effect of the disappearing reconstruction on Southern Blacks, he seemed to deride those who fought to maintain reconstruction. Likewise, he belittled reformers, the Mugwumps. Yes, you can fault with individuals trying to make things better, but I have never understood the political cynicism that takes such great pleasure of finding fault with those trying to make things better while seeming to wink at those who are corrupt.
So while I finished the book, and learned from the book, I came away thinking it could have been much better

[JerryDeanHalleck · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ma, Ma, where's my pa?
Gone to the White House. Hahaha.

Dry, if interesting, study of the 1884 election. Although both sides tried to paint the other as extremists, its hard to think of a POTUS election that was so "much a do about nothing". In reality, Blaine and Cleveland had only minor differences on domestic issues, and the USA was completely isolationist with a 27,000 man army.

The political cartoons, along with the discussions of the Prohibition, Greenback, and People's party were the highlight. On the negative side: we got far too much writing on the South, which was never going to Blaine, no matter what. In fact, from 1880-1948, the 11 states in the Old Confederacy voted Republican only 6 out of 191 times. Even in 1928, the so-called "Anti-Catholic South" voted 6-5 for Al Smith.