Archive
1876–Cartoon–Corey Bruce
This cartoon was illustrated by A.B. Frost based on a George Colt design. It appeared in Harper’s Weekly on September 2, 1876. The underlying message of this cartoon was to paint Samuel J. Tilden as politically corrupt. In 1868, Tilden acted as campaign manager for Horatio Seymour, the Democratic Party Nominee and Chairman of the New York State Democratic Committee. A year after that election, Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune and a Republican, wrote a public letter to Tilden accusing him of allowing the New York Democratic Party to commit voter fraud. The actual letter written to Tilden from Greeley is placed in the upper right corner of cartoon. The Republicans felt that, by bringing this back into the spotlight, they could convince voters that Samuel Tilden was and still is a corrupt politician.
The rest of the illustration uses imagery representative of a scene from William Shakespeare’s Macbeth. In that story, Macbeth, the main character, murders to the good King of Scotland, Duncan, to gain power and rule. One of Duncan’s generals, Banquo, suspects that Macbeth has gained his power through an evil deed and voices this to the kingdom. Because of that, Macbeth ordered the murder of Banquo as well. Banquo then appears to Macbeth in the form of a ghost continually condemning him for his sins.
Pictured in the cartoon is Samuel J. Tilden as Macbeth sitting in a chair in his study. He appears horrified, guilt stricken and embarrassed as the ghost of Horace Greeley, the Republican Presidential Candidate in 1872, stands over him in condemnation. Here Greeley is pictured as Banquo’s ghost. As he points to the letter he had earlier written to Tilden, he is essentially haunting him of his past sins of corruption. Picturing Greeley as a ghost, also symbolizes his death before the Electoral College casted their votes in 1872.
Though this is blatantly an attack on Tilden and the Democratic Party by the Republican Party, it is not farfetched to see it as an inadvertent attack on the Democratic Nominee by his own party. Horace Greeley, in the election of 1872, ran as a Liberal Republican against Radical Republican, Ulysses S. Grant. Greeley, however, was nominated by the Democratic Party. So even after Greeley wrote that letter to Tilden, the Democratic Nominee in 1868, accusing him of allowing voter fraud, the Democratic Party still endorsed his nomination in the following election. The cartoon does not only illustrate the political corruptness of Samuel J. Tilden, but it also symbolizes a weakness in the Democratic Party, especially in their decisions over the past three elections.
Despite Republican efforts to burry Tilden as a strong opponent, the election of 1876 was one of the most controversial and close elections in American history. Samuel J. Tilden outpolled Rutherford B. Hayes in the popular vote and had 184 electoral votes to Hayes’s 165. However, twenty votes went uncounted and were disputed in three states, Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, each party claiming those states. The twenty disputed electoral votes were ultimately given to Hayes, giving him the victory over Tilden.
1860–Republican Cartoon–Sarah Moran
The Election of 1860 has gone down in history as the election that ultimately caused the Civil War. At the outset of this election the country was divided and the results of the election just pinned the two sides against each other even more. For my first piece of rhetoric, I thought it was important to highlight the divisive nature of the election and the state of the country at this point in history.
My piece of rhetoric ran in “The Wide Awake Pictorial,” a Republican publication in the North. To understand the rhetoric you must understand the background and the history at play during this election.
At the beginning of the election, the formerly dominant Democratic Party split into Northern and Southern factions. John C. Breckenridge, a Democrat from Kentucky headed the South with running mate Joseph Lane. Stephen A. Douglas, a Democrat from Illinois headed the North with running mate Herschel V. Johnson (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”).
While the Democratic Party was in turmoil, the Republicans were strategically planning their attack. At the convention, the leading Republican candidate was Senator Henry Seward of New York. With the weakened Democratic Party, the Republicans knew they could pull out the victory. Seward had an avid anti-slavery agenda and the Republicans did not think they would win with a candidate so extreme on the hot topic of the election. With this in mind, they chose a more moderate candidate in Abraham Lincoln from Illinois. Lincoln’s running mate was Hannibal Hamlin (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”). The Republicans had to be strategic when it came to choosing their candidate in this divisive election and they chose the right one in Lincoln.
Although the election was mainly a contest between the Democrats and the Republicans there was a third party candidate in 1860, John Bell, who ran as a Constitutional Union candidate with Edward Everett on his ticket (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”).
Slavery was the hot topic of the election and served as the major difference in the party platforms. The Republicans favored “free soil” in Western territories, discontinuing the expansion of slavery. The issue of slavery proved so strong that it ultimately divided and weakened the Democratic Party. As common with the party at the time, the Democrats in general were in agreement with the expansion of slavery into new territories. However, Southern Democrats wanted a Federal Slave Code for all new territories and the Northern Democrats wanted the new territories to decide (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”).
Now back to the piece of rhetoric at hand. In this pro-Republican cartoon, the state of the country is depicted by the rough and stormy sea. The nation was already on the brink of the Civil War with this election serving as the tipping point. There are three boats pictured in the cartoon, each with a different party label. The Democrats are featured in complete chaos, losing their oars and looking for help symbolizing the divided Democrats who had previously been so dominant. The Know-Nothing Party capsized in the storm symbolizing that they were essentially extinct at this point in history. Men are depicted in the water climbing into the Republican boat symbolizing the trend in which the Know-Nothings jumped ship to the Republicans’ boat because of their avid non-slavery stance (“The Boat that Rides in Safety”). The forefront of the cartoon features the Republicans, with Lincoln commanding the ship and taking the waves in stride.
The placement of this cartoon is also important in fully understanding its rhetorical power. The cartoon was featured in “The Wide Awake Pictorial” a Republican publication in the North. The cartoon was also interestingly featured on November 1, 1860, right before Election Day. When taking those two factors into account, the purpose of the cartoon was to rally the party faithful by reminding them about the weakened state of the Democratic Party, encouraging them to get out and vote for Lincoln. It is also important to know who the Wide Awakes were. The Wide Awakes were a group of Republicans who garnered support for Republican candidates during this time period by noisily marching, singing and dancing in parades. These men wore glazed helmets and capes during their demonstrations and served as police at polling locations to discourage voting fraud (“The Boat that Rides in Safety”). During this election, the Wide Awakes proved to be an influential factor in the North with Lincoln taking the majority of the North.
This cartoon creatively explains the political state of the country during this time period. The nation was divided by party and essentially by the sole issue of slavery. The election was so divisive that Lincoln did not even run on the ticket in most Southern states (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”). After the votes had been counted, Lincoln took the presidency for the Republicans without carrying a single Southern state however. The Republicans victory was made possible with the two Democratic candidates splitting Democratic votes and essentially defeating each other. Many Southern states stayed true to their word following the election and South Carolina seceded less than a month after Lincoln took office. The election of 1860 will always be seen as a pivotal point in American history.
Works Cited
“The Boat That Rides in Safety.” Harp Week. Web. 20 Apr. 2011. <http://elections.harpweek.com/1860/cartoon-1860-Medium.asp?UniqueID=18>.
“United States Presidential Election of 1860.” Encyclopedia Virginia. 28 May 2009. Web. 20 Apr. 2011. <http://encyclopediavirginia.org/United_States_Presidential_Election_of_1860>.
1876–Harper’s Weekly Cartoon–Corey Bruce
This political cartoon illustrates how the Republicans, supporting Rutherford B. Hayes, viewed the dominant forces of the Democratic Party. The setting of the cartoon takes place on the road to St. Louis, Missouri, where the Democratic National Convention was being held, as portrayed by the sign in the upper left corner. The five characters marching each represent one of the stereotypical dominant figures of the Democratic Party.
On each character in the cartoon, is a label with the word “Reform.” This is a reference to Samuel Tilden, the expected Democratic Nominee who later ended up running against Hayes in the Presidential Election. Tilden was often referred to as a reform governor from New York and therefore chose “reform” as the main theme to his campaign.
The large man leading the march was referred to as a “shoulder-hitter.” This person was a physically powerful man who typically used acts of violence to force his will upon the political system. He is dressed in the striped garment of an inmate accompanied by chains and shackles, which represents his violent nature. The tipped “sporting man” hat and the cigar were typical accessories of important and powerful men in society. In his left hand, he is shown dragging a crying “Reform Rag Baby” by the hand. The Rag Baby was typically used to represent inflation or “soft-money.” One important issue circling the 1876 election came from the push of the nation’s farmers, many who were deep in debt. They felt that by increasing the nations money supply, it would generate inflation and help them reduce their debt. They therefore demanded that the government implement a soft-money policy by increasing the money supply. This however, stirred controversy elsewhere due to feelings of uncertainty and insecurity from an irredeemable paper currency, with its fluctuations in value. The Democratic Party was divided over the issue with hard-money, gold standard supporters in the Northeast and soft-money inflationist supporters in the West and South. It is not so surprising that Tilden was a hard-money supporter unlike other potential Democratic Nominees, which provides more evidence that this cartoon is in direct reference to his potential nomination as the Democratic Candidate in this election.
Behind the “shoulder-hitter” and “rag baby” is a Roman Catholic priest carrying a document inscribed with the phrase “death to public schools.” The Catholic Priest represents the predominantly German and Irish Catholic immigrants that made up a crucial voting community for he Democratic Party. Anti-Catholic groups often accused Catholics of being loyal first to the Vatican and not the United States projecting an unpatriotic image on this primarily Democratic society. The word “Pope” as well as the Vatican symbol also appears on the document being held by the Priest. The phrase “death to public schools” refers to the primarily Protestant nature of public schools at the time. Typically, state funds had been distributed to a variety of different school systems. Catholic schools therefore received their fair share. However, Public-School supporters accused the Catholic Church of attempting to destroy the emerging public-school system.
Peaking up from behind the Priest is a member of the Ku-Klux-Klan. He is wearing the hat and mask of an Italian banditti, which symbolizes anarchistic brutality and on the hat rests a skull and crossbones, which signifies death and is a common symbol used by the Ku-Klux-Klan. This refers to two other important issues salient to this election. The use of “death” represents the Klan’s resistance to both Reconstruction as well as Black Civil Rights.
The figure in the back is supposed to look like a Tammany Chief disguised as a cigar storefront Indian on a dolly. Tammany Hall was the principal group of the Democratic Party in New York City and acted as a great influence at the state and national levels. During the 1860s and 70s, Tammany Hall was lead by the corrupt William “Boss” Tweed who finally fell in the early 1870s to the honest John Kelly. John Kelly is the man pictured as the Tammany Chief holding a hatchet and a bottle of alcohol. Because Kelly did not truly agree with Tilden’s nomination, he is being pushed by another man dressed as an inmate whose identity is unknown.
1876–Hayes Acceptance Letter–Corey Bruce
This letter was written by Rutherford B. Hayes on July 8, 1876 as an acceptance of his nomination as the Republican Candidate for the office of President of the United States of America. He, however, did not present this speech, which was common in political rhetoric of the time. He begins his speech and spends a majority of the speech not discussing his policies on the War, reconstruction, and the economy, rather discussing various resolutions made by the convention. Hayes begins with the fifth resolution of the declaration of principles of the convention, which explains how the system has changed, and appointing power has been passed down to congress, where offices act as rewards for party services rather than public services. He claims that the system destroys the independence of the separate departments of the government. One appeal to the way he addresses the current flaws in the system is his constant reference to the founders of this government and the preservation of those ideals. The irony of this lies in the fact that both parties (Hayes and Samuel Tilden, a Democrat from New York) mounted “mudslinging campaigns” displaying strong party ties. Rutherford expresses his loyalty to the Republican Party stating that his views are “in accordance with the convention’s principles.” Even his own nomination was strewn with partisan corruption as leaders of the reform republicans met privately to nominate him even though James G. Blaine held the higher popular vote for the Republican Party.
Another interesting claim of his was the fact that he does not propose the option for re-election and will not be running for a second term regardless of the results of his term in Presidency. He believes that the two-term policy can evoke temptation to use the patronage of office to promote re-election causing those in office to make decisions that will heighten the likelihood of re-election rather than basing decisions off what is best for the nation. Hayes refers to his potential election to office as a <duty> and he carries that ideograph throughout the speech while promoting an “intelligent and honest administration of the government, which will protect all classes of citizens in their political and private rights.”
By the end of the speech, Hayes finally touches on his policies and promises. Because both Hayes and Tilden were both in favor of civil service reform and an end to reconstruction, Hayes focused briefly on the economy, currency issues, the public school system, and people’s rights before closing his speech. He addresses the condition of the Southern States and the constitutional rights of all people. The Constitution plays a large role in Hayes’ argumentative style when acknowledging the Southern States. He preaches equality and the rights of those states, like all states, to “obtain for themselves the blessings of honest and capable local government.” If he is elected, he will “regard and cherish” the truest interests of the South; the interests of the white and of the colored people both and equally. He again uses the Constitution to support the argument that “a division of political parties, resting merely upon distinctions of race, or upon sectional line, is always unfortunate, and may be disastrous.” At this point he is able to tie in his policies on Southern succession, reconstruction, and people’s rights to his initial argument against partisan division and in favor of a civil policy, which will “wipe out forever the distinction between the North and South in our common country.”
<Unity> is another ideograph that becomes prominent throughout the speech. The idea of unity within the government and political parties is spread to the larger concerns of the North and South in regards to sectionalism. Hayes’ goal in his speech is to focus the intentions and operations of the government as well as the people of the states on common good, people’s rights as stated in the Constitution, and to frame the Office of the American Presidency in terms of a duty towards and representation of the citizens of the States and the Nation as a whole.
Rutherford B. Hayes goes on to win the election of 1876 by a measly one electoral vote while losing the popular vote at 47.5%.
1888–Voter Tickets–Ryan Castle
The voter tickets are an important piece of rhetoric in the 1888 election between Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland as it centers on an important issue that received significant notice, yet was not done justice; the idea that Harrison “bought” the 1888 election in key states primarily the hotly contested swing state of Indiana.
In this Gilded Age there was no such thing as a secret ballot. The political parties would simply print ballots and give them to their voters who would in turn use them at polling stations. Each state would produce different ballots for each party but the ballots that were distributed were easily changeable. The Democratic ballot for Cleveland shown as the ballot to the far right for example, has several alterations. The Republican candidate, D.B. Henderson is ink stamped over the crossed out Democratic one. Also, the State Ticket candidates for Railroad Commissioners has a slip of paper pasted over it with the names of the Republican candidates. The county ticket is also altered as P.S. Webster, the republican candidate for County Attorney is written over the crossed out Democratic candidate, M.T. McNutly. Changes to the ballots, like the one shown, illustrate how easy it was to steal votes in that era, but the controversy over stolen votes has a bigger story to tell.
The first whiff of scandal started with Matthew Quay, the Republican senator of Pennsylvania. Quay was made chairman of the Republican National Committee right before the 1888 election. With the idea to win small majorities in highly populated states, Quay spent lots of money to buy voters throughout various states. Some questionable results illustrating this include the mere 2,400 votes garnered by Harrison in Indiana despite receiving 15 electoral votes, the 14,400 votes won by Cleveland in New York and 36 electoral votes in contrast to 55,000 votes won by him in Mississippi against only 9 electoral votes and Cleveland’s 60,000 votes in Georgia while receiving only 12 electoral votes. Throughout these states, Cleveland won the popular vote yet Harrison won the electoral. New York would of had particular importance to Harrison in that it was Cleveland’s home state.
However, there was no question that Indiana was the most hotly contested state in the 1888 election. In fact,1888 was regarded as one of the most intense political campaigns in decades. Cleveland had won Indiana in 1884 and, since it was Harrison’s home state in the current election, he needed it for honors sake and it didn’t help that Indiana was dead even at the time. This pushed Harrison to take an extra step to secure it. That step was to elect republican campaigner William Wade Dudley as Treasurer of the Republican National Committee. Dudley was known for condemning democrats who violated election laws and the Republican party was known to be firmly against it. However, Dudley proved to be a hypocrite. In a circular letter to Indiana’s county chairmen, he told them “Divide the floaters into blocks of five, and put a trusted man with the necessary funds in charge of these five, and make them responsible that none get away and that all vote our ticket.” The term “floaters” referred to voters who would sell their vote for money. Dudley’s plan failed near the end of the election, however, when an Indiana railway postal agent came in contact with one of the letters which led to the Democrats distributing thousands of copies of it nationwide. Dudley fought the allegations to the bitter end, but continued buying voters.
The realization of Quay and Dudley’s actions had extremely important impacts on America’s voting system. In fact, the consequences of this wrongdoing stirred the nation to change their voting procedure entirely. The nation switched from printed ballots and created the secret ballot. The secret ballot, where a voter writes their choice on a piece of paper and puts it into a box to be counted, ensures th
e voter’s privacy so no acts of fraud can occur.
Interestingly enough, despite this illegal act and the public’s knowledge thereof, Harrison won the election while losing the popular vote, an extremely rare occurrence amongst American elections. While Harrison knew well of Dudley’s deviousness, he faced no repercussions. Perhaps the reason why Harrison won regardless was due to his more active campaigning or maybe Quay and Dudley actually did play an important role. Either way, voter fraud could be an important clue as to why Harrison won the election even though Cleveland had more of the popular vote.
Sources:
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h755.html
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/object_nov98.html?c=y&page=2
http://davidoffutt.wordpress.com/2008/11/23/election-crises-1888-and-2004/
1888–The Murchison Letter
From COMM 458 student Ryan Castle:
Possibly one of the most important pieces of rhetoric created during the election of 1888 between Democratic candidate, Grover Cleveland and Republican candidate, Benjamin Harrison is the Murchison Letter. This letter highlights one of the most influential topics during the time of the election; free trade and its connection with Great Britain.
The issue between free traders and protectionists was one that dated back to the Dallas Tariff of 1816. At the end of the War of 1812, Great Britain had stockpiled large amounts of iron and textiles. Since Great Britain had so much, their costs plummeted in comparison to those of American manufacturers thus leading to many Americans buying from Great Britain. The Dallas Tariff was then created by the United States to help bolster sales among American manufacturers that previously could not compete with Britain. This was especially important for the northern states as their economy was most dependent on manufacturing and the tariff enabled them to better compete with Britain. The tariff was received negatively by southern states, however, as it increased production costs on crops, notably cotton. It was also unpopular among New England merchants who wanted to restore trade with Britain. Nevertheless, international competition between the United States and Great Britain was still a dominant issue over 70 years later during the 1888 election.
Benjamin Harrison supported the idea of tariffs as a way for the United States to compete internationally with Great Britain, the primary country of concern. However, Grover Cleveland was against the tariffs and this led him to be associated with Great Britain, a country that supported free trade, and a costly connection to have at the time period as it gave him unfavorable notice among farmers and war veterans. Apart from trade disagreements, there was another heated issue taking place between Great Britain and the United States during the election. That issue was a longstanding one, involving which Canadian waters (controlled by the British at the time) would be allowed to be used by United States fishermen. In response to this issue, Cleveland appointed Thomas Bayard to negotiate an agreement with Britain. While Bayard and British colonial secretary, Joseph Chamberlain reached an agreement in February of 1888, it was rejected a few months before the election by the Republican-controlled Senate. This act cites another example of the stark disagreement between the candidates on dealing with Britain and set the stage for the final blow against Cleveland, the Murchison Letter.
The Murchison Letter was the final and possibly single most important incident that cost Cleveland the election. The letter was a “dirty campaign trick” in which a California Republican named George Osgoodby wrote a letter to the British Ambassador to the United States, Sir Lionel Sackville-West. Osgoodby, disguising himself in the letter as a former Englishman now California resident named Charles F. Murchison, asked how he should vote in the upcoming election. The response, from which the Murchison Letter gets its name, suggested that the vote be cast for Cleveland, claiming he would be the best choice for someone favoring Britain. The Republicans published this letter just weeks before the election with devastating results.
The results of the Murchison letter had the most significant impact on Irish voters who made up a significant portion of New York, Cleveland’s home state. The Irish were particularly disgusted to see support of Great Britain by an American presidential candidate and this cost Cleveland the state of New York and arguably, the election. The impact of the letter is comparable to the “Rum, Romanism Rebellion” act executed by Cleveland in the previous election which led to his narrow win. During the 1884 election, spokesman for the Republicans, Reverend Dr. Samuel Burchard, made a noteworthy statement. The statement, “We are Republicans, and don’t propose to leave our party and identify ourselves with the party whose antecedents have been rum, Romanism and rebellion,” was seen as an attack on Roman Catholics. Cleveland took advantage of this and publicized it. The impact cost James Blaine, Cleveland’s Republican opponent, the state of New York in much the same way it would cost Cleveland in 1888.
Particularly noteworthy is how a single incident can have significant effects on voters, whether valid or not, simply because of publicity. The Murchison Letter is a prime example of this. While Cleveland was portrayed in a negative light by the wording of the letter, others argue he was simply standing up for what he believed was right in a time where his beliefs were unpopular. Cleveland wasn’t necessarily pro-British but it is interesting to note how his stance on a certain issue can take us down a “dark road” as a result of campaigning that leads to other implications that aren’t necessarily true and how widespread these beliefs can become simply because of media involvement. In retrospect, one could say Cleveland got a taste of his own medicine.
Sources:
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h973.html
http://elections.harpweek.com/1884/bio-1884-Full.asp?UniqueID=1&year=1884
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2008/01/17/phony-letter-helped-unseat-a-president
1888–Anti-Harrison Political Cartoon
From COMM 458 student Ryan Castle:
This piece of rhetoric is from the 1888 election between Grover Cleveland and Benjamin Harrison. Harrison was a Republican from Indiana and Cleveland was a New York Democrat running for his second term in office.
This piece of rhetoric is important in that it highlights how these two candidates ran their campaigns. Historically, candidates would not campaign and Cleveland adhered to this tradition by leaving all of his campaigning to be done by his vice president, Allen G. Thurman. In fact, the only actual campaigning done by Cleveland was “front porch campaigns,” common to the era, in which he would receive delegations and make pronouncements from his home town in New York. Harrison, on the other hand, took a very active approach to his campaigning by the standards of the era. Unlike Cleveland, he would have newspapers cover his front porch campaigning and had one of the most well-funded campaigns of the time.
Another important issue regarding this political cartoon is that it takes us back to the election of 1840 in which Benjamin Harrison’s grandfather, William Henry Harrison, won and became the ninth U.S. president. Especially important is the fact that William Henry Harrison was regarded as the war hero in the battle of Tippecanoe, an aspect that gave him a considerable edge in the election of 1840. William Henry Harrison, leading an army of 1,100 against a reform movement by an eastern tribe to halt the sale of Indian land to whites, fought a battle that was seen to have improved the safety of white settlements in Indian territory and destroyed the confederation of eastern tribes. Benjamin Harrison, however, had his own war credentials as he commanded Indiana volunteers in the Civil War. Although this political cartoon compares Benjamin Harrison to his grandfather in a negative light, the war record of him and his grandfather were nevertheless positive attributes he carried with him to the election that granted him popularity among former Union soldiers.
The cartoon depicts Grover Cleveland extending a bag full of money to Benjamin Harrison that reads “10,000 courtesy of Pius John to help carry Indiana.” This illustrates his well funded campaigning and suggests that he received money from Pius John, a wealthy merchant who was considered the “father of advertising” at the time. It also suggests that Benjamin Harrison’s strength among voters in Indiana, a swing state at the time, is obtained solely through charitable donations by wealthy businessmen like Pius John. This attack holds it’s own weight in that there was speculation that large amounts of money were being used to purchase votes in key swing states, including Indiana, throughout the election. Another interpretation is that since Cleveland won the state of Indiana in the 1884 election, this contribution would be needed in order for Benjamin Harrison to win the state in the present election.
Also, Benjamin Harrison is portrayed as wearing a hat too big for his head. This hat is supposed to be his grandfather’s, William Henry Harrison, and suggests he does not compare to the heroic reputation of his grandfather, despite his participation in the Civil War, given that he associates himself with wealthy individuals. This brings us back to the type of political campaigning prevalent in the 1840 election where personal attacks determined the victor. William Henry Harrison was running as a war hero while his opponent, Martin Van Buren, was portrayed as rich and snobby, insinuating that Benjamin Harrison would better fit the latter category.
This piece of rhetoric is interesting in that it does not place emphasis on either candidate’s stance on the tariff issue which was the biggest issue of this campaign. It is especially interesting given that Cleveland initiated the tariff issue when he proposed a dramatic reduction in tariffs in his annual message to Congress. It was believed by Benjamin Harrison, however, that the United States, being a low-cost exporter at the time, needed high tariffs in order to combat foreign competition. This put Cleveland in an awkward position since it hurt his position among farmers and veterans, further enhancing the edge that Benjamin Harrison had already gained among these groups given him and his grandfather’s war record. Perhaps this explains by its own means why the issue wasn’t brought up by Cleveland.
Interestingly, while this political cartoon had some substance in that it highlighted a devious deed going on at the time (the issue with purchasing votes in Indiana) and attempted to attack one of Harrison’s strongest attributes, the stronger campaigning orchestrated by Harrison was probably the most important factor that led to his victory in this election.
Sources:
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h757.html
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h290.html
Presidential Campaign Rhetoric 