Charles Coatesworth Pinckney elected POTUS in 1800

"The plot of an old Spanish play is not more complicated with underplot."
--Fisher Ames on the 1800 presidential election

In both 1796 and 1800, the Federalists ran John Adams for president and a Pinckney (from the well-known South Carolina family) for vice-president. In 1796, it was Thomas Pinckney, popular for having recently negotiated a favorable treaty with Spain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pinckney In 1800, it was Thomas's older brother, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, who was famous for having rejected the French demand for a bribe with "No! No! Not a sixpence!" Both elections demonstrated one of the problems of the pre-Twelfth Amendment method of electing a president: there were in those days no separate votes labeled "votes for president" and "votes for vice-president"; rather, each elector voted for two persons, and the person with the most electoral votes (if it was a majority) became president and the one with the second most became vice-president. Thus, a person who had really been thought by everyone to be the vice-presidential candidate might instead--with an extra electoral vote or two--become president instead. This fact almost made Burr president in 1800; and in both 1796 and 1800, it created the possibility that (with Alexander Hamilton's support), a Pinckney could have become president. I have already discussed Thomas Pinckney's presidential prospects in 1796 at https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ney-some-notes-on-hamiltons-1796-plot.314564/ In this post I will discuss the possibility of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney becoming president in 1800, and how it was blocked by yet another Pinckney.

By 1800, Alexander Hamilton, who had been lukewarm about Adams in 1796, was totally alienated from him. (The feeling was of course mutual. Adams denounced Hamilton as leader of a "British faction" and angrily told Secretary of War McHenry that Hamilton was "the greatest intrigu[er] in the World--a man devoid of every moral principle--a Bastard, and as much a foreigner as Gallatin. Mr. Jefferson is an infinitely better man...You are subservient to Hamilton, who ruled Washington, and would still rule if he could." Elkins and McKitrick, *The Age of Federalism*, p. 736 https://books.google.com/books?id=9RyG29bER3QC&pg=PA736) As in 1796, he would have been happy to see a Pinckney become president instead. His strategy was to urge Federalist electors to vote for both Adams and Pinckney. The ostensible justification was to prevent a widespread scattering of second votes which would benefit the opposition as it had done by making Jefferson vice-president in 1796. Somewhere, the Hamiltonians argued, one or two electors would drop Pinckney, and this would be enough to permit Adams' re-election and still ensure against a repeat of an opposition vice-president. This was the exact argument the Republicans would adopt in urging *their* electors to vote for both Jefferson and Burr. The difference is that the Republicans meant it, whereas the Hamiltonian plotters did not really have an Adams-Pinckney victory in mind; rather, they wanted Pinckney to get the same number of Federalist votes as Adams, so that with the help of some otherwise Republican electors in South Carolina (where Pinckney was popular even among Jefferson supporters), he would actually get more electoral votes nationwide than Adams and would therefore become president.

In the end, Hamilton did (in contrast to 1796) succeed in persuading almost all the Adams electors to vote for Pinckney as well (except for one Rhode Island elector who voted for Adams and John Jay). (This of course had its counterpart in much greater Republican unity behind Burr than in 1796.) The electoral vote outside South Carolina stood at 65 votes for Jefferson, 65 for Burr, 65 for Adams, 64 for Pinckney, and one for Jay. The key was therefore how the eight electors from South Carolina would vote. The state legislature in this traditionally most Federalist of southern states now had a nominal Republican majority, but party lines were still somewhat vague, and many of the Republican lawmakers were also devoted to Pinckney. What complicated things still further was the discovery of the Gabriel Prosser conspiracy in Virginia, which raised fears about the dangers of the Republican appeal to equality in a slaveholding society.

As it turned out, the decisive role was played by Charles Cotesworth Pinckney's second cousin, Senator Charles Pinckney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Pinckney_(governor) Charles Pinckney, elected as governor in 1789, had started out as a Federalist, but had become alienated from the Washington administration. Initially, this may have been a matter of resentment over being passed over for the ambassadorship to Great Britain in favor of his cousin Thomas in 1792. In any event, by 1795, he denounced Jay's Treaty, aligned himself with the Republicans, and won election to a third term as governor in 1796. In 1798 he was elected to the US Senate. By this time, he was not on speaking terms with his cousins CC or Thomas, and was regarded by South Carolina's Federalists as a traitor, "Blackguard Charley." In 1800 he managed Jefferson's campaign in South Carolina.

Charles Pinckney decided not to be on hand for the opening of the winter session of Congress in Washington on November 17, 1800 because it was more urgent for him to be in Columbia, South Carolina. According to Elkins and McKitrick (*The Age of Federalism*, pp. 742-3):

"As for all the arts he used and how they were applied, this is still a subject of conjecture. but we do know in more than a general way the results they achieved. The number of Federalist legislators was almost equal to the number of those committed to Jefferson and Burr, though neither side had quite enough for the majority required to carry their ticket. In between were some dozen to sixteen waverers, more or less Republican but whose party attachments were qualified by an equal or greater attachment to Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. The internal struggle that surged back and forth during the ten days prior to the final balloting on December 2 was one in which a variety of cross-pressures were brought to bear upon this knot of irresolutes. The Federalists tried to detach some of them for their ticket, while temporary groupings of Jefferson men, working at odds with Charles Pinckney's aim for a straight Republican ticket, made at least two efforts for a compromise that would result in a divided slate of Jefferson-Pinckney electors, one version of which would have given Pinckney the vice-presidency, and the other the presidency.

"In the end, Charles Pinckney's labors--a mixture of appeals for Republican unity and inducements of influence in a Jefferson administration--prevailed, and the eight electors chosen on the final day were all committed to Jefferson and Burr..." https://books.google.com/books?id=9RyG29bER3QC&pg=PA742

(Ironically, Charles Pinckney actually succeeded on behalf of the Jefferson-Burr ticket a bit too well for Jefferson's---and Burr's--own good. If he had just allowed *one* South Carolina elector to vote for Jefferson and CC Pinckney instead of Jefferson-Burr, Jefferson would have become president without the race going to the House. Consequences would include (1) much less Republican resentment of Burr, who would remain a viable if controversial future presidential possibility, (2) probably no Burr-Hamilton duel, (3) probably no Burr conspiracy--whatever it was--and (4) much less pressure for a Twelfth Amendment, inasmuch as the "system worked.")

OK, so suppose that Charles Pinckney for some reason dies before the 1800 election and the South Carolina electors are split between, let us say, six (basically Republican) votes for Jefferson and Pinckney and two "straight" Federalist Adams-Pinckney. The result is that the national electoral vote stands at 72 votes for Pinckney, 71 for Jefferson, 67 for Adams, 65 for Burr, and one for Jay. CC Pinckney is elected POTUS. Consequences?

(1) He will be seen as an illegitimate president by both Republicans and Adams Federalists. The latter will claim that Hamilton tricked them, though it really should not have been that hard to see through his plans. (Nevertheless, it is true that the Hamiltonians did use deception on Adams loyalists. One of them, Robert Goodloe Harper, who had recently moved from South Carolina to Maryland, told a nervous Adams supporter not to worry because, he assured him, South Carolina was not only sure to go Federalist but would actually be more solid for Adams than for Pinckney!)

(2) President Pinckney will also have to face a hostile Congress. Republicans picked up twenty-three seats in the House (giving them close to a 2-1 majority) and seven in the Senate (enough to give them a majority of two, the first time they had ever controlled the upper chamber). (Indeed, in view of the congressional election results, it may be surprising that the presidential election results were so close. Part of the reason is that the Federalists prevented an at-large popular election in Pennsylvania, which would almost certainly have resulted in Jefferson sweeping the state.) Naturally the Sedition Act is dead, there is no possibility of war with France (which is not to say that Pinckney would *want* to renew the Act or to go to war with France, only that even if he did, there would not be the slightest chance of success), and Pinckney will have a hard time getting appointees, especially judges, confirmed in the Senate. He will be widely regarded as a lame-duck president. By the 1802 elections the Republicans may have veto-proof majorities (even without the likely help of some Adams Federalists).

(3) In view of these facts, it may be questioned whether CC Pinckney would even accept the presidency. He promised New England Federalists that he would not accept any votes for himself that were not also cast for Adams, and certainly did nothing to bring about any such votes in South Carolina. And yet--don't forget that Burr likewise said at first that he would never betray Jefferson or the wishes of the American people, but then lapsed into silence when it appeared he might actually win the presidency. I couldn't totally rule out the possibility that CC Pinckney might yield to temptation...
 
Might Federalists actually urge Pinckney to accept. Because the alternative isn't Adams . . . the alternative is Jefferson. In fact, you could see Adams having one of his occasional fits of civicmindedness and himself urging Pinckney to accept. Especially if Pinckney comes to Adams for advice and is clearly not scheming/working with Hamilton.

The statesmanlike thing to do would be to accept but with the promise to fix the problem with an ATL 12th Amendment that includes a provision for a new presidential election as soon as it is ratified. That makes Pinckney look good, so if something happens to Adams in the meantime so he is OK with Pinckney running (or is dead), Pinckney might actually win that election. OTL, the 12th Amendment only took about 6 months to ratify after Congress voted on it. ATL, I would be surprised if it too much longer than that. You potentially could have the new Presidential election as soon as 1801.
 
If Pinckney is elected, is there really no chance of Federalist legislature comebacks? With Pinckney, I assume the divide between Hamilton and Adams would be less pronounced publicly as Adams would have no power so the party would be more unified to fight against Jefferson's Republicans.

Also, any chance Hamilton goes back into the Cabinet? And any chance a standing army could be built?
 
Top