Sectional Stress and Party Strength: A Computer Analysis of Roll-Call Voting Patterns in the United States House of Representatives, 1836-1860 (review)

party alignment, in fact, shortly disintegrated and did not reappear until die 1820's and die Jackson era. Even dien, as Nichols sees it, "die party of today" had not developed. Jackson's Democratic party was largely "a personal following." But there were forces at work that would soon create parties—the emergence of professional politicians in the several states and the development of die national nominating conventions. These forces first made themselves felt in the election of 1840, die first time diat "one organized and marshaled party" defeated anodier. The process was completed, and also the creation of party machinery, in 1848, when die Democrats established a central committee to operate die party during die campaign and die next four years, and designated die first national chairman with more dian "immediate campaign responsibilities." Nichols closes his account widi 1848, but he briefly notes die campaigns of 1852 and 1856, in which the final step to complete "die basic pattern of the political machine" was taken—the development of techniques by the parties to raise campaign funds. The book is recommended to both the general reader and the specialist. The former will find it a sparkling yet informative description of American political developments. The latter will not find much diat is new, but he will discover a convenient syntiiesis of scholarship in political history—and some of die wisest and most penetrating comments yet made about our party system. T. Harry Williams Louisiana State University Sectional Stress and Party Strength: A Computer Analysis of RoU-CaIl Voting Patterns in the United States House of Representatives, 18361860 . By Thomas B. Alexander. (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1967. Pp. xvii, 263. $10.00. ) Increasingly scholars are applying quantitative techniques to die analysis of American political history. Professor Alexander's systematic study makes a major contribution to this new trend and to our understanding of die collapse of national parties before die Civil War. The author imaginatively utilizes a computer on selected roll-call votes to construct scalograms and other ingenious indices in order to measure and "display die gross influences of party alignment and sectionalism" on congressional voting behavior between 1836 and 1860. The book is divided into two parts. The first contains interpretations of the voting patterns of each Congress in die period. The second consists of a tabular presentation of all the data on the voting. Because of die vast amount of information contained in these tables and scalograms , die book long will be an invaluable source for historians interested in the period. On die basis of elaborate quantitative evidence, Professor Alexander finds a high degree of party unity and discipline in die House for most of die 61 62CIVIL WAR HISTORY period, especially die years before 1850. The reason for dus remarkable cohesion was diat nonslavery matters, particularly questions of economic policy about which Whigs and Democrats had coherent and conflicting philosophies, formed die bulk of die business of die House. Sharp NorthSoutii antagonism on slavery matters destroyed party disciplines in 1850, and the parties failed to reform clear lines in die next two Congresses, aldiough no distinct overall North-Soudi pattern appeared eidier. Widi die emergence of die Republican party in die late 1850's, however, the clear two-party alignment on all issues reappeared, as Republicans virtually replaced northern Whigs in voting patterns. Most important, however, is die persistent sectional antagonism diat continuously weakened the bonds of party loyalty and by die late 1850's coerced die parties into sectional lines. Disagreeing witii Joel Silbey's assertion of die triumph of party over section in congressional voting in die 1840's, Professor Alexander stresses diat although die parties were normally polarized on economic issues, diere was a constant difference between northern and soudiern delegations within each party. On slavery matters, Democrats managed some cohesion because northerners voted die soudiern position, but from die 1830's on die Whigs continually split along NorthSoudi lines. Once slavery matters became die major business of the House in die 1850's, die voting on all issues split along sectional unes that coincided widi die new Republican-Democratic alignment. "Real and persistent sectional differentials in interests and attitudes" divided die people of die...