William Henry Harrison, ninth President

4 pages (7 1/2 x 12 in; 190 x 305 mm) on a bifolium, Cincinnati, 25 November 1835, to William Ayres, reception docket; leaves separated and reinforced at central fold. 

FUTURE UNITED STATES PRESIDENT WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON DEMONSTRATES EXCEPTIONAL POLITICAL ACUMEN BY REVEALING HIS CREDO NOT TO MAKE PLEDGES, AND IS KEENLY AWARE THAT HIS ACTIONS TO GET NOMINATED MAY BE USED AGAINST HIM IN THE ACTUAL CAMPAIGN. HARRISON ALSO RESENTS THAT ANTI-MASONIC LEADER THADDEUS STEVENS, IS “DETERMINED TO SUPPORT [DANIEL] WEBSTER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES OR ANY PERSON BUT ANY OLD JEFFERSONIAN DEMOCRAT LIKE MYSELF.”

A significant number of Founding Fathers were Freemasons, but as politics grew increasingly democratic in the Age of Jackson, many rural Americans believed Freemasonry represented urban arrogance, secrecy, and rituals that posed a threat to Republican democracy. Starting in 1826, an anti-Masonic movement gathered momentum and had a powerful impact on American politics. The Anti-Masonic movement began in upstate New York, and within a few years, spread through Pennsylvania, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic States, eventually reaching onto the Northwest Territory of the Ohio Valley. While many resented the Anti-Masonry movement, some states elected officials to Congress and their respective state governments on the Anti-Masonic Party ticket. It was America’s first third party, and was instrumental in elevating the careers of such luminaries as William H. Seward, William Lloyd Garrison, and Thaddeus Stevens. By 1836—the year following this letter—the Anti-Masonic movement had been absorbed into the Whig Party.

Both the Whigs and the Anti-Masons nominated Harrison at their conventions in December. Stevens refused to accept Harrison’s nomination solely because Harrison would not pledge to be Anti-Mason, and called for a National Anti-Masonic Convention to be held in May 1836. With no popular support for such a move, Stevens reluctantly endorsed Harrison. Martin Van Buren won the election, but the Whigs showed wide national support. In late 1838, the Anti-Masons endorsed Harrison, in effect merging the two parties. Having been promised a cabinet post, Stevens campaigned vigorously for Harrison. After Harrison died a month after his inauguration, Stevens dropped out of politics and returned to his law practice. He later served in Congress, first as a Whig (1849-1853), then as a Republican (1859-1868), and gained national recognition during Reconstruction and the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson. Stevens died just three months after the trial ended.

Here, presidential hopeful William Henry Harrison explains to William Ayres, lawyer and politician from Pennsylvania, his refusal to take a public Anti-Masonic stand, to make any personal pledge that might cost him the election, or to say anything that might come back to haunt him once in office, stating: "[Thaddeus Stevens'] object seems to be to procure from me a declaration that I will, if elected, appoint no adhering Mason to office in anti-Mason states. This appears to me to be new ground taken by the Anti-Masons and which cannot but result in injury to their cause – could any President make the declaration that he would be governed by that principle & decline to act upon the converse proposition in states where the anti-Masons were in a majority. … No person who would avow such principles can possibly be elected to the Presidency. He would not get an Electoral vote in one of the Western States. And I think it extremely probable that the avowal of such sentiments would be the means of concentrating an opposition in the Senate of the United States against the anti Masonic interest sufficiently strong to prevent the passage of an anti-Masonic nomination . … Mr. Stevens forgets that the President whom the anti-Masons might elect could do them little or no good if the Senate were opposed to them. … I do not mean to express any opinion which should govern the appointments to office in Pennsyl[vani]a—I confine myself exclusively in my remarks to the Govt of the U States. … Now even if I were determined to do so I would not pledge myself to do it—for I SET OUT WITH A DETERMINATION TO MAKE NO PLEDGES—If the Anti Masons rely upon my openly avowed opinions against Masonry one would suppose that they ought to be satisfied with the certainty of their having a full proportion of my confidences. … Can it be possible that the anti-Masons will nominate a candidate who will not get a single electoral vote in any of the Western states or South of the Potomac? I refer to Mr [John Quincy] Adams not to Mr [Daniel] Webster. …”

Harrison concludes by referring to his past conduct, “Now is it not apparent from these facts that a President of the U States cannot act upon the same principles as the Gov[ernor] of a state? The one the Agent of 24 sovereign authorities [there were 24 states in 1835]—the other of one only —The difficulty of forming a single rule for a President is further increased from the circumstance of the immense differences in the size of the States & their perfect quality as to rights and from that too of the mode of his election (whether by the electors or by the representatives of the States) clearly pointing him out as the peculiar guardian of the interest of the weaker members of the great political family. … But example is better than precept, & practice than theory—I refer to my conduct during the 13 years of my government of Indiana & the North Western Territory as furnishing some grounds by which to ascertain what it might be in the discharge of a somewhat analogous trust. …”