Joseph I. France for President, 1932

If you flip through the aggregate records of Presidential primaries, one anomalous item you’ll find is incumbent President Herbert Hoover losing the popular vote to former Senator Joseph I. France in 1932, carrying four states to France’s seven, with three other candidates carrying one state each. This fact, combined with France’s heterodox views on foreign policy, make the ’32 primary, though far less important in that era, a tempting target for inquiry.

I succumbed to that temptation, and I am reporting back that the situation is not as interesting as it first appears. An investigation of contemporary reporting reveals a gadfly campaign with delusions of grandeur that Hoover, rightfully, declined to take seriously, and which crumbled under a single blow. An overview of my own investigation into the subject is below. There is already a very useful full-career biography of Senator France, a dissertation from the ‘50s by Sally B. Geoghegan, studying at the University of Maryland. This post, the rump of an aborted research paper, is intended to flesh out a brief episode; but anyone looking for serious information should look to Geoghegan.

Senator Joseph I. France Wikimedia Commons.

Background

Joseph I. France was born in Missouri in 1873; after attending college in New York he studied biology at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts. He found his way back to Maryland, the family home, to study medicine and pursue successful business ventures in Baltimore, and lived in Cecil County.[1]

France was elected to the State Senate in 1905, nominated without opposition by the Cecil County Republican Party on a platform opposed to the dominant Gorman-Rasin-Poe faction of the Democratic Party’s efforts to allow local officials to disenfranchise large swaths of voters and elected in the nominally Democratic county that November over former Democratic State Senator (and future Governor) Austin Crothers.[2] He developed a reputation for integrity in his single term; he did not stand for re-election in 1909 out of frustration with the establishments of both parties at the repeated failure of his progressive bills.[3]

France turned down a Congressional nomination in 1910, but returned to the political fray in 1916. The Republicans sought a candidate who could unify the party’s regular and Bull Moose factions in the pivotal Maryland Senate race; and factional leaders united behind France, winning him the nomination over conservative outgoing Governor Phillips Lee Goldsborough.[4] He defeated Congressman David J. Lewis, a prohibitionist and former socialist, after the latter underperformed in Baltimore. The city’s Democratic Party bosses did not align with their nominee ideologically and had preferred the renomination of Senator Francis Preston Blair Lee, who had won the popular vote in the primary but secured fewer convention delegates than Lewis.[5]

Heretofore, France’s political ideology had been Jeffersonian: he did not support government control over the economy, but did support regulations, and the promotion of civil liberties and minority rights.[6] In one of his campaign speeches, he described the American ideal as the state’s service of the individual, that individual freedom should be as great as possible constituent with public welfare, and that, in the description of biographer Sally Geoghegan, “better social conditions should be brought about by making the state perform its social function so well that a finer and truer individualism would result.”[7] Contrasting himself with Lewis, France said that Lewis

“stands for government ownership. I stand for governmental control. He stands for socialism. I stand for Americanism and Individualism. He stands for more government. I stand for better government. He stands for the narrow appeal which brings misunderstandings and divisions. I stand for a broad brotherhood which knows no class distinction.”[8]

In the Senate, however, France would become more noteworthy for his heterodox views on foreign policy. He was notable as one of the “irreconcilables” opposed to the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles. Unlike some of the nationalists and conservatives, France, along with a few other senators like Robert La Follette, George Norris, or Asle Gronna, was an internationalist and an optimist who wished to see a more robust league and a less harsh peace. France hoped that a proper international organization would help reduce arms buildups and prevent conflict, and deal with the world’s growing population by helping raise the living standards of other countries.[9] Finding the Treaty of Versailles too harsh and the League of Nations too small-fry, he envisioned a “world federation” of countries deciding policy democratically; it would propose international law and otherwise provide advice and guidance on completing progressive goals.[10]

Even more noteworthy, however, were his views on the Bolsheviks. France condemned the American intervention in Russia on behalf of the Whites, and wished to see aid, especially agricultural equipment, sent to the country.[11] Indeed, his first run-ins with Herbert Hoover resulted on his Russia policy, which was not shared by many other policymakers. France thought that Hoover’s agreement at Riga for relief through the American Relief Administration was insufficient, and that full trade with Russia should be resumed and the Soviet government recognized. He announced that his investigations, including working to free an imprisoned Marylander, showed him that “There is little communism in Russia. Extreme experiments in that direction proved unsuccessful and the constructive party, of which Lenin is the head, was courageous enough to force an abandonment of Marxian theory and a restoration of certain sound capitalistic policies which are now in effect.”[12] In 1922 he accused Hoover of choosing to send the Russians corn, an unfamiliar crop,[13] and later of having used his control of ARA supplies as leverage to secure Soviet support for an associate’s business interests.[14]

France it known that he was available for the 1920 Presidential nomination, if the convention were to deadlock. He did not compete in Maryland’s preference primary, however, or organize a campaign beyond a speaking tour, or even become a delegate to the convention. Maryland press was in favor, though, including H.L. Mencken, who said that “Of all the 96 men in the upper body there is not one, during the great debates of the war and after, who has displayed a better temper, a shrewder understanding of the essential problems of the time, a more patient industry, or a cleaner and decenter independence.” France expected the Maryland delegation’s convention vote, but it was instead cast for Leonard Wood, the winner of the preference primary; the delegation found his views to be too extreme. France’s name was not even placed in contention.[15]

Up for re-election in 1922, France defeated John W. Garrett, former Ambassador and recently the secretary of the Washington Naval Conference, in the Republican primary. Democrats nominated William Cabell Bruce, president of the state bar association, and were happy to run against France, whom the New York Times described as “flighty, fantastic, full of whims,” a man of “unstable temperament and shifting political fantasy” who had “won for himself and his State an unfortunate notoriety.”[16] The election revolved around France, as Bruce focused his fire on the Senator instead of the Harding Administration, hoping to secure Republican support.[17] Though France had, in the New York Times’ words, “for all his whimsies, a full purse, was supposed to have ‘the negro vote,’ to be sure of the regular Republican vote with various radical and ‘liberal’ additions,” his reputation, positions, and issues such as his support for seating “corrupt” senator Truman Newberry of Michigan, were too much to overcome, and he went down to defeat.[18] After the Senate, he tended to his business interests, including failed attempts to start trading ventures in Russia, and served on the Maryland Republican Party’s Central Committee.[19]

Before the Maryland Primary

France came out of retirement to announce his candidacy for President on April 7, 1931. He came out in favor of the repeal of the 18th Amendment, support of his “concert of nations” proposal from his Senate term in lieu of the League of Nations, opposition to extension of government ownership, and pursuit of recognition of Russia. He claimed “no promises of support” as of his announcement. He said of the 18th amendment that it “involves two paramount issues: shall we elect to the Presidency any man who can condone such a terrific blow struck at the very roots of constitutional government? Shall the people elect to the Presidency, at this critical time, any man who has lacked the candor and the courage to state boldly and clearly where he stands upon this and every important issue of vital concern to the American people?”[20]

Maryland’s Republican establishment was unimpressed. Senator Goldsborough’s response to the announcement was that his “judgement is that the Republicans of Maryland are for President Hoover’s renomination;” party chair Galen L. Tait said that he believed “the passengers on the ship of state would prefer Mr. Hoover as the captain now at the helm.”[21] The Baltimore Sun was sympathetic, however, saying that “Now that Senator France has broken the ice with a blast decidedly anti-Hoover in character, the charm which has protected the President against open intra-party criticism may lose some of its effect. If this actually happens, Dr. France’s candidacy will have been justified.” It went on to say that France’s platform was “pitch[ed] upon a high level,” and that his stance on prohibition would attract support in the eastern states. “Senator France has set an example of dignity and careful reasoning for other foes of the administration to follow.”[22]

France opened his campaign on July 11, 1931, at his estate, Mount Ararat Farms, in Cecil County. He arranged for Lyle Rader, a chemist and religious speaker, and former Senator Jonathan Bourne of Oregon, a progressive Republican, to speak. He considered a tour of “the grain States” subsequently, considering attending grange events in Nebraska, Minnesota, and the Dakotas.[23] Noting that he was the first candidate in the field, and that anyone else would be running against him, not he against them, France told an audience of 500 that he opposed continuation of war reparations, that Europe’s existing debt from World War One should be cancelled upon condition of full disarmament and “the establishment of a new order on international such concert as would insure prosperity and permanent peace.” He thought that reincorporating Russia into the global economy would serve to alleviate unemployment “if she should begin to buy on a scale commiserate with her resources,” instead of isolating the country and leaving it “not performing her normal function as the largest, most central and absolutely indispensable organ in a world economy.” He declared he would curb the recent growth of executive power, “an end to the taxing of the people for the payment of swarms of Federal spies, agents and special officers, who may become parasites, blackmailers, sappers of political morality, a menace for liberty,” and a repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment.[24]

France wrote to the New York Times that he did not expect victory, but that “I do hope by my candidacy to bring to the American people a vision of what might be accomplished both in domestic and international affairs if all our policy and action were to be based on the principles of love and brotherhood…. If I can secure enough publicity for a platform of real cooperation applied to international and domestic issues, instead of a narrow nationalism and a ruthless and destructive competition, to cause the President to measure his policies by the yardstick of moral law as laid down by the greatest founders of all the inspired religious beliefs, I shall be satisfied with the results of my candidacy.”[25] He told the New York Herald Tribune that if he won, he would not “attempt to assume the role of dictator either of my country or of my party,” but would cooperate with Congress on policies that would restore “truly popular and constitutional government.”[26] He opposed military spending and still railed against American entry into World War One, saying that he would dismiss federal officials who were “apostles of the doctrine of blood and iron.”[27]

As the election year began, Republican opponents of Hoover held out hope that Senator Borah or Senator Hiram Johnson of California would enter the race against him. France’s candidacy was not considered a serious threat by Hoover supporters or opponents.[28] France filed for the North Dakota primary, to be held in March, while a faction of progressive Republicans and Non-Partisan League members held a state convention and endorsed him.[29]

Columnist Mark Sullivan wrote in the New York Herald Tribune that Hoover’s victory would come “in a matter of course” and that it was better for him to appear above the fray, tending to a nation in the grips of the Great Depression. Summarizing France, he said that “It is no unfair to say that the impression he made was eccentric,” and thought that France and Coxey might get fifteen or twenty delegates combined.[30] France, meanwhile, was refighting the last war, telling audiences such as the Republican Women of Baltimore Ward 27 that Russian markets could have taken American agricultural surpluses after the last war, and American cooperation with Russia would have been in line with constitutional principles (inalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and so on) and would have prevented the Great Depression. He claimed not to have advocated recognition, but said integrating Russia into the economic system was essential. A return to the principles of the founding fathers would end the depression in four months.[31]

France also filed for the Illinois primary. When no other candidate filed, France’s campaign managers in New York announced that their candidate was assured of the state’s 61 delegates. The vote, however, was nonbinding, and the delegates would be elected directly in the primaries; Hoover’s camp had decided to ignore the advisory primary and focus on electing their delegates.[32] Hoover took a similar approach in North Dakota, where only France, Pennsylvania Representative Louis T. McFadden, and Jacob S. Coxey, unemployment relief activist and leader of “Coxey’s Army” of the 1890s, of Ohio filed.[33] France knocked Hoover for declining to file or delaying his decisions: “The reason is obvious. He knows only too well how the great majority of his own party regard him, and what the verdict would be.[34]

France’s team was optimistic; they announced that, along with support from the Illinois Republican establishment and from Horace Mann in the south, that they expected to secure 19 delegates from Maryland, 27 from Minnesota, 37 from New Jersey, 13 from each Dakota, every delegate from New York outside the city, and others from Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Ohio, Oregon, Montana, and Colorado.[35] France told newsmen that he would have 296 votes locked down by early March. France was either bluffing or woefully misinformed, as he believed that he would take every delegate in a primary where he was running unopposed (he intended to contest all primaries), announcing in one parenthetical that “under Illinois law the votes automatically go to me” as Hoover had not filed

In many states France’s forces contested only primaries, and not delegate selection; such as Ohio, where Hoover filed to allow candidates for delegate to run as pledged to him, but did not file in the preference primary, while France, Coxey, and local attorney Olin J. Ross ran in the primary but only had three delegate candidates between them.[36]

His campaigning in North Dakota paid off, as he defeated Coxey by, according to incomplete results several days later, 31,247 to 21,668.[37] It was initially unclear, however, how much this mattered. Hoover won nine delegates, with two others pledged to an unspecified progressive candidate. “We assume that Dr. France understood the rules,” his hometown Baltimore Sun claimed, “Still, we cannot but be amazed that a Marylander would spend his good money in North Dakota to put over a lot of fellows who would not stand hitched for a single ballot.” The paper called it “a skin game which demands the attention of the police.”[38] Looking forward to the upcoming Illinois primary, where France was unopposed but the delegates were similarly unbound, the paper said that “at least our doctor is showing what a very silly primary law is set up in some of the States.”[39] North Dakota Senator Lynn Frazier, a progressive opposed to Hoover, claimed that the primary result was binding, but North Dakota Attorney General James Morris said that the statute was ambiguous, precedent pointed to nonbinding results, and that he would only formally rule if asked to by one of the delegates.[40]

The Illinois and Nebraska primaries came next, on April 12. France was the only candidate on either ballot.[41] A few days later, when about three-quarters of the vote had been counted, France had 30,379 Nebraska votes and Hoover had 7,507 write-ins.[42] These primaries too were merely advisory, and establishment forces elected their slates of delegates without opposition from France’s organization. France, however, said that Hoover did not have a “moral or legal right” to claim these delegates, and said that 76 delegates (50 from Illinois, 9 from North Dakota, and 17 from Nebraska) were legally bound to support him, as well as the two North Dakota delegates bound to a progressive candidate and the 11 Illinois delegates to be chosen at a convention at the end of the month. These were to be the last advisory primaries: Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, West Virginia, and Oregon made support of the primary winner mandatory, according to France.[43]

This was in fact the case in Maryland, and Hoover’s forces filed his name on the ballot shortly before the deadline in mid-April; thus obviating the need to campaign for an uninstructed delegation.[44] France immediately announced to the Baltimore Sun that he could “not make any fight here.” He continued to press, however, his novel argument about delegates. He told the paper that he claimed “by every law of right” the delegates from the states where he alone had filed for the primary; this included Pennsylvania, New Jersey, West Virginia, and Oregon, where the filing deadlines had passed. Additionally, since there were several states “most probably in the anti-Hoover column” and he was Hoover’s only opponent, he counted on their delegates as well: New Mexico, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Idaho, Minnesota, and three unnamed southern states would thus put him at 375 votes at the convention, and he intended to claim these delegates “by every legal means available,” including going to court. After all, he asked the paper, “is it a clever but not criminal piece of political chicanery by which they seek to secure these delegates? I shall resist it, before all right-minded men of America… Can their scheme be proved to go the length of a criminal conspiracy to violate state law?” When asked about the primaries being advisory, he noted that voters weren’t obligated to vote for the candidates on the ballot, citing write-in votes for Hoover and for La Follette eight years earlier. No state, he told the paper, was actually pledged to Hoover yet, and “no outstanding leader, outside of his own official family, has spoken in favor of his nomination.”[45] He told his hometown newspaper that he entered the primaries against the incumbent President because,

“Believing in the right of the people to select as well as elect their candidate for President, and confident in the righteousness of my cause I entered alone, almost unsupported, the primaries of nine States. With all the power and patronage of his great office and with a press largely subservient, subject to federal influence, if not control; with anxious brow-beaten Federal officials everywhere and innumerable favor-seeking sycophants at his beck and call, the President dared not meet me like a man in fair and open political battle. In these states where the people have reserved to themselves the right to sit in judgement upon Presidential candidates.”[46]

The actual delegate count: by April 23, there had been 445 Republican delegates assigned and Hoover claimed or had pledges from all but 22 of them.[47]

Despite his earlier claim, France headed to the campaign trail in his home state. He told the New York Times that he intended to make multiple speeches per night from a sound truck; he blamed the President’s forces in the Maryland Republican establishment for announcing the contest too late for France to form an organization.[48] He told audiences that “It is rather unusual for a candidate for President to make a campaign from the end of a truck, I’ll admit, but in this case it is necessary.” The truck played “Maryland, My Maryland,” “Dixie,” and a jazz tune. France told audiences that the country could be fixed “in a few months” by returning “to those things advocated at home and abroad by George Washington;” after the country had decided after the war to “let the Russians stew in their own juice and let disputed Austria starve,” the 18th Amendment had been implemented by “a lot of political hijackers who didn’t believe the people could rule themselves. Since then there has been built up an invisible republic within our nation.” He said that Hoover’s delegate count was “b-a-l-l-y-h-o-o,” adding that the President “had to come into my own State to try to kill my candidacy.” At one stop, before an audience of 75, he mentioned the 18th amendment, upon which a group of children started shouting “We want beer!” France had to halt the speech and say, “Good,” then, after reflection, adding, “No, you don’t want beer, you want liberty – beer comes after that.”[49]

France’s Maryland campaign met a tepid response. When he called some Eastern Shore party leaders, they had not even heard of his candidacy.[50] Nevertheless, he kept at it; the Baltimore Sun editorialized that “Our bewilderment at the optimism and the buoyancy with which Dr. Joseph I. France is battling Mr. Hoover for the Republican nomination for President is second only to our wonder and admiration at his extraordinary to meet and overcome obstacles. In the doctor’s lexicon there is no such word as ‘quit.’”[51] He told a crowd at the Negro Elks Hall that Hoover was a “London aristocrat Woodrow Wilson Democrat” who should be forced out of the party,[52] and on a streetcorner told a small crowd that Hoover was a “common, ordinary racketeer” who knew “nothing about the Constitution of the United States.”[53] After the Kentucky delegation was decided for Hoover, France put forward his usual alternative whip count. He said that “the only news politically was my carrying Pennsylvania” in another uncontested advisory primary, and that ‘if I carry Maryland, Hoover’s name will not come before the convention. I am as sure Hoover is out of the race as I am of living.”[54] He told another streetcorner audience that in the primary, there would be on the ballot only the names of “Joseph I. France of Maryland, who believes what you believe in, and that of Herbert Hoover, of California, who believes in – God knows what.”[55] On his last day of campaigning he said that Hoover feared the people’s verdict, and that he had run against him because “autocratic rule and dictatorship are odious to me.”[56]

France had campaigned in Baltimore for the two weeks between the filing deadline and the primary. Hoover, though backed by Senator Goldsborough, Republican Party Chairman Galen L. Tait, and the rest of the state machine, had not had any visible campaign.[57] Hoover was victorious, however; with 1262 out of 1365 precincts reporting, Hoover had 25,065 to France’s 16,510, with 1,275 votes for an uninstructed slate.[58] Analysis after the fact said that Hoover had intended and achieved a repudiation of his opponent in France’s home state.[59] France’s hometown Baltimore Sun, however, said that France “threw a scare” into Hoover forces by taking an early lead on election night, and his defeat by only 10,000 votes left Hoover and the state Republican machine “sorely embarrassed.” France won several legislative districts in Baltimore, but his only county-level victory was his base of Cecil County. France won 11,811 votes in Baltimore to Hoover’s 15,637 in the Sun’s initial tally; the vote in the other counties was 10,328 for Hoover to 4,707 for France. This primary vote was, as usual, not a direct popular vote, but elected delegates to the state convention. France obtained 11, Hoover obtained 123 with at least 14 undecided in the initial count. “It seems that the State of Maryland has been willing to give the Presidency away,” France said, “and I am content.”[60]   

After the Maryland Primary

The media thought that France’s campaign had been finished off. Never taken seriously, he now has been extinguished utterly,” wrote the New York Herald Tribune.[61] Hoover’s delegate count had surpassed the needed tally by over a hundred, by the Los Angeles Times’s count.[62] The West Virginia primary came a week later; France was unopposed, but the delegates were again unbound, and all were already pledged to Hoover.[63]

France, however, was undeterred. He crowed about his Illinois tally, finalized a month after that vote, giving him 345,499 to Hoover’s 1,750 write-ins.[64] France was again unopposed in the New Jersey primary on May 16th, and the Oregon primary on May 31st, where he received 64,148 to Hoover’s 17,639 write-ins.[65] By the end of the month, France claimed that the real delegate count was 413 to Hoover’s 142. “I have 231 instructed delegates,” he told the Washington Post, and there are 52 from States favorable to me making 283, and there are 87 delegates from States which are definitely anti-Hoover and 43 more from States  presumably against the administration.” France said that “the press” was covering up his victories, and wrote that,

“In lists of delegates, reported as being for Hoover, there are always placed delegates from States which have instructed for me. Sometimes there is a generous concession that some of these are ‘claimed’ by me. I claim only what is mine by legal right and it will be unwise and vin for Mr. Hoover or another to claim delegates, instructed for me, for there will be a penalty… Mr. Hoover might be nominated without the vote of delegates to which I am entitled, by the can not be nominated and elected if he takes any of my delegates before they have discharged their duty to the people and to myself by sincerely supporting my nomination. No man can be elected President of the United States whose nomination is tainted with fraud and dishonor.”[66]

Hoover’s Maryland win was “a virtual repudiation” anyway, as he had won over 300,000 votes in the last general election, but only a tenth of that in this primary.. “If you had lost in the Presidential preference primary in Maryland, as you have lost by defeat or your failure to file as a candidate in the other states having Presidential primary laws, would you have claimed the delegates as you are now claiming[?]” France asked Hoover in his statement. He conceded Maryland’s 19 delegates to Hoover, but asked if Hoover would then concede the 213 delegates France claimed to have already won.[67]

On May 29th, the Assistant Attorney General of North Dakota, Charles Simon, ruled that the state’s delegates were not bound to support France; one of the delegates had requested a ruling.[68] The New York Times counted 642 instructed and pledged delegates for Hoover, and only 13 for France, those of Oregon.[69] The Chicago Tribune counted the same, though noting that France claimed, by then, North Dakota’s 9, Pennsylvania’s 75, Illinois’ 50, New Jersey’s 35, West Virginia’s 19, and Nebraska’s 17.[70]

The Baltimore Sun, France’s hometown paper, noted in a review of the growth of the primary system that, despite his predicament, “the doctor’s efforts have brought more or less attention to the country’s primary experiments and the vagaries of some of the systems. Events of the next few months will emphasize further the cumbersome and roundabout manner in which our Presidents are elected.”[71]

As Republicans gathered in Chicago for the convention, France could be found arguing for “positive leadership” on repealing Prohibition, and against resubmission to the states. “I am confident the convention will favor repeal of the Volstead act and the eighteenth amendment. With that true the nominee must be a wet. I not only voted against the amendment but predicted the evil results that have followed in its wake.”[72] France claimed to have a secret plan to block Hoover’s nomination, though it did not involve any action at the meeting of the RNC, which he attended as a proxy for former Senator William P. Jackson.[73] Meanwhile, his one undisputed stronghold began to desert him: one of Oregon’s 13 delegates announced his vote for Hoover, as only precedent suggested support of the winner of the state’s preference primary.[74]

The night before the convention, France was the only one campaigning. He had a suite at the Congress Hotel, with four secretaries. His last statement demanded demanded an immediate repeal of all prohibition enforcement laws, and a nationwide referendum on repeal. More acutely, he proposed a rule that delegates be required to vote for the candidate of their state’s preference primary, having heard a “rumor” that Hoover claimed some of the same states that he did.[75]

The first night of the convention, in a session of only a couple hours, led to a defeat for the wets on the party platform, as a plank banning direct repeal was defeated.[76] The second and final night was when France was finally forced to face reality. After the nomination speech for Hoover, delegate L.B. Sandblast of Oregon mounted the podium to place France’s name in the nomination. A large part of Sandblast’s speech directly quoted France’s announcement and other statements, Sandblast ended by saying that,

“This staunch Republican, upholder of his party’s dearest principles, occupies a unique position in our national life. At times he has been called too radical, at others too conservative. He belongs neither to the right wing of greed nor to the left wing of license. He is as radical as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, and as conservative. He believes that the prime function of all government is not to maintain the right of nation against nation and empire against empire, but to safeguard the rights of the individual man to life, liberty and happiness. To him patriotism is more than love of his land, it is a love of the principles of the imperishable Republic of the United States. Without political and financial support, as a crusader for a cause, not as a candidate for office, he entered the primaries of nine States which have presidential preference primary laws, and in those nine States he received 1,122,000 votes, or more than eleven times as many popular votes as his nearest competitor.”[77]

After Sandblast concluded his speech with a burst of enthusiasm and a Lincoln quotation, France attempted to be recognized for a question of personal privilege. He was asked for his delegate credentials by Bertrand Snell, the permanent chairman. In the phrasing of the official convention records, “Mr. France began fumbling through his pockets, pointed to a badge on his breast, but presented nothing.” When Snell tried to begin the roll call of states, France insisted on his right to speak as a delegate of Oregon. “You are not a delegate from the State or Oregon,” Snell told him.

“I am a delegate from Oregon. You look at my credentials.”

“But I know,” Snell replied, “that you are not on the list of delegates accredited to this Convention from the State of Oregon.”

“Look at your list of delegates. Look at the record,” France insisted.

“I know what the record shows. You are not a delegate to this convention. Retire from the platform.”

“Well, put me out!” Said France. “I dare you to put me out.”

Snell did, and had the Sergeant at Arms escort France off the platform.[78]

As he was escorted off, France shouted, “You will have to carry me off. I have my rights. You know what I am going to do and you are trying to stifle me.” The Sergeant at Arms was joined by four policemen, who took France forcefully down the platform’s stairway, almost knocking him over in the process, and brought him to the convention’s small police station, where he was interviewed and gave a speech before departing. He had held the proxy of one of the Oregon delegates, and had intended to gain the rostrum to decline his own nomination and propose the nomination of Calvin Coolidge for President, the former President’s name having been kicked around by pundits for most of the season. France was sure, he said, that his speech would cause a stampede toward Coolidge.[79] “The treatment was absolutely illegal and outrageous,” France said. Claiming that he had told Snell that he wanted to make a nominating speech, and that Snell and the other leaders had known that a Coolidge stampede would be the result, France said that “This action was illegal. Hoover’s crowd was afraid if Coolidge were named the convention would run away from them. When the people of the United States realize that Hoover was nominated by these methods and that a candidate for President with delegates from seven States was denied speech, there will be a serious repercussion in the country. It will help the Democratic party.”[80]

The vote was called. Of 1,154 delegates, Hoover received 1,126 ½ votes; Coolidge received 4 ½ (3 ½ from Illinois and one from Wisconsin); France received 4 (three from Oregon and one from Pennsylvania); Senator John J. Blaine of Wisconsin received 13, and six went to other candidates or were not cast.[81] Regardless of whether he was in order to make a nomination, whether his delegate proxy status was legitimate, and whether his plan would have worked, France’s hundreds of delegates were, indeed, not bound to him.

Aftermath

France sulked through the general election, staying on his farm. He ruminated to the Baltimore Sun on third party options (not himself, but perhaps others) and who the Democrats should nominate (Governor Albert C. Ritchie of Maryland). He called Snell “the grand old bouncer.”[82] After Senator Burton K. Wheeler described France’s ousting in the Congressional Record, a pamphlet reproducing the speech was mailed throughout Washington in August; France denied responsibility, but did say he had a suspect in mind. France said that he was supporting his party’s nominee, “I am not doing anything to help Roosevelt or hurt Hoover. If I wanted to do anything I would do it in a big way.”[83] After Hoover’s landslide defeat, France was one of several Republicans who joined a meeting to discuss rebuilding the party, outside of the confines of the current establishment though ostensibly planning to cooperate with them.[84]

This apparently bore fruit, as France was the party’s Senate nominee in 1932, defeated in the general election by former state Secretary of State George Radcliffe. This story, whether it is one of nearly-triumphant homecoming or of a bitter final defeat, will have to be included elsewhere. France died a few years later, in January of 1939, at age 65.[85]

France’s decidedly quixotic campaign may have indeed indicated popular discontent with Hoover, presaging the latter’s decisive defeat by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Hoover may have been wise not to play on France’s turf when he didn’t need to. On the other hand, Hoover’s victory in Maryland, despite France’s repeated protests that the President’s supporters surprised him and didn’t give him a fair chance to campaign, was clearly a repudiation of France in the former Senator’s electoral base, where he undoubtedly had the most contacts to call on, the most favors to cash in, and the highest name recognition. This, coupled with his either playful or utterly delusional claims about his delegate count and his clear misunderstanding, whether in good faith or otherwise, of the delegate rules for preference primaries, renders France’s 1932 story one of a grandiose gadfly rather than one of a plucky underdog.  

Notes

[1] Geoghegan, S.B., The Political Career of Joseph I. France of Maryland, 1906-1921 (Master of Arts Dissertation, University of Maryland, 1955), 3-8

[2] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 11-14.

[3] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 30-31.

[4] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 38-48.

[5] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 54-63.

[6] Stone, Ralph, The Irreconcilables: The Fight Against the League of Nations (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1970), 184.

[7] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 57.

[8] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 58.

[9][9] Stone, The Irreconcilables, 179-80.

[10] Stone, The Irreconcilables, 136-37.

[11] Stone, The Irreconcilables, 40, 69.

[12] Weissmann, Benjamin M., Herbert Hoover and Famine Relief to Soviet Russia: 1921-1923 (Stanford: Stanford University, 1974), 72-73.f

[13] Patenaude, Bertrand M., The Big Show in Bololand: The American Relief Expedition to Soviet Russia in the Famine of 1921 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), 146.

[14] Weissman, Herbert Hoover and Famine Relief to Soviet Russia, 140.

[15] Googhegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 129-33.

[16] Ranson, Edward, The American Mid-Term Elections of 1922: An Unexpected Shift in Political Power (Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2007), 114-15.

[17] Ranson, The American Mid-Term Elections of 1922, 187.

[18] Ranson, The American Mid-Term Elections of 1922, 242-43. Most Newberry supporters were in the conservative wing of the Republican party, and many were defeated that year. For more on the issue, see Kelman, Maurice. "Campaign on Trial: The Unnecesary Ordeal of Truman Newberry." Wayne Law Review Vol. 33 (1986): 1573ff; or the book (which I have not read!) Curbing Campaign Cash: Henry Ford, Truman Newberry, and the Politics of Progressive Reform by Paula Baker.

[19] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 139.

[20] “Ex-Senator France Out Against Hoover,” Boston Globe, April 8, 1931, p. 12.

[21] “Jos. I. France Files Nomination Papers,” Baltimore Sun, April 9, 1931, p. 3.

[22] Baltimore Sun, “Dr. France Goes In,” Chicago Daily Tribune, April 15, 1931, p. 12.

[23] “France Stands Ready to Open G.O.P. Fight,” Baltimore Sun, July 6, 1931, p. 18.

[24] “Front Porch Speech Made by Dr. France,” Baltimore Sun, July 12, 1931, p. 18. He was not a full wet, however, as after repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment he would have recommended a law setting a limit on alcohol content. “France Denies Candidacy as a Wet,” New York Times, September 11, 1931, p. 12.

[25] France, Joseph I., “Senator France’s Ambition,” New York Times, July 14, 1931, p. 21.

[26] “France Expects ’32 Nomination by Republicans,” New York Herald Tribune, August 7, 1931, p. 8.

[27] “Would Oust from Power Officials Loving War,” Baltimore Sun, August 19, 1931, p. 2.

[28] “Borah is Invited to Oppose Hoover,” New York Times, January 14, 1932, p. 8.

[29] “France’s Name Filed in North Dakota,” New York Times, January 20, 1932, p. 21. “France is Indorsed,” Baltimore Sun, January 26, 1932, p. 2.

[30] Sullivan, Mark, “Renomination of Mr. Hoover Held Assured,” New York Herald Tribune, January 18 1932, p. 6.

[31] “G.O.P. Women Hear Joseph I. France,” Baltimore Sun, January 21, 1932, p. 4.

[32] Evans, Arthur, “Lewis Entered for Nomination by Democrats,” Chicago Tribune, February 12, 1932, p. 9.

[33] “Open Battle for Roosevelt Gets Started,” Baltimore Sun, February 13, 1932, p. 1.

[34] “Dr. France Says West is Unit Against Hoover,” Baltimore Sun, March 4, 1932, p. 5.

[35] Fleming, H.K., “Dr. France Claims Illinois Backing,” Baltimore Sun, February 12, 1932, p. 4.

[36] “Hoover Makes Bid for Ohio Delegates,” New York Times, March 10, 1932, p. 2. “Hoover Certain of Majority of Ohio Delegates,” Chicago Daily Tribune, March 12, 1932, p. 11.

[37] “Roosevelt Increases His Lead,” New York Times, March 18, 1932, p. 6.

[38] “It Looks Very Fishy,” Baltimore Sun, March 19, 1932, p. 12.

[39] “Foolish Business,” Baltimore Sun, March 29, 1932, p. 10.

[40] “State Attorney-General Says Law is Ambiguous,” Baltimore Sun, March 20, 1932, p. 4.

[41] “Three Democrats Contest Nebraska,” Baltimore Sun, April 10, 1932, p. 16. “Illinois Primaries Near Heated Close,” Washington Post, April 10, 1932, p. M4.

[42] “Roosevelt Nebraska Lead Increases,” New York Times, April 14, 1932, p. 2.

[43] “France Disputes Hoover Claim to Delegates,” Baltimore Sun, April 16, 1932, p. 4.

[44] “President Files for Maryland Primary Race,” New York Herald Tribune, April 17, 1932, p. 2.

[45] “France Claims 236 Votes by Rights,” Baltimore Sun, April 17, 1932, p. 7.

[46] Ibid.

[47] “Primaries in 2 States This Week,” Hartford Courant, April 24, 1932, p. 12.

[48] “France Begins Campaign,” New York Times, April 21, 1932, p. 17.

[49] “Children Demand Beer of Dr. France,” Baltimore Sun, April 23, 1932, p. 3.

[50] “France Forsakes His Truck for Telephone on Sabbath,” Baltimore Sun, April 25, 1932, p. 18.

[51] Editorial, Baltimore Sun, April 27, 1932, p. 10.

[52] “France Competes with Jazz Band,” Baltimore Sun, April 25, 1932, p. 18.

[53] “Dr. France Calls Hoover Racketeer,” Baltimore Sun, April 28, 1932, p. 3.

[54] “Hoover Claim ‘Lie,’ Says Dr. France,” Baltimore Sun, April 29, 1932, p. 3.

[55] “Dr. France Catches Up with His Truant Truck,” Baltimore Sun, April 30, 1932, p. 3.

[56] “France Fires Last Shot at Republican Leaders,” Baltimore Sun, May 1, 1932, p. 4.

[57] “2 Contests Mark State Primaries,” Baltimore Sun, May 1, 1932, p. 4.

[58] “Hoover Easily Wins Over France in Maryland Vote,” Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 1932, p. 2.

[59] “Hoover Foe Defeated,” Los Angeles Times, May 3, 1932, p. 1.

[60] “Blue Laws Killed by 83,990,” Baltimore Sun, May 3, 1932, p. 1. France carried the Sixth legislative district, while the Second and Fourth were still in doubt in initial returns.

[61] “Maryland Snuffs Out Mr. France,” New York Herald Tribune, May 4, 1932, p. 16.

[62] “Exit Mr. France,” Lost Angeles Times, May 4, 1932, p. A4.

[63] “West Virginia Vote Today,” New York Times, May 10, 1932, p. 9.

[64] “France Says Illinois Gave Him 345,499 Votes, Hoover 1,750,” Baltimore Sun, May 14, 1932, p. 20.

[65] “Jersey Primaries Today,” New York Times, May 17, 1932, p. 2. “Wet Beats Hawley in Oregon Recount,” New York Times, May 24, 1932, p. 4.

[66] “413 Against Hoover, Is France’s Claim,” Washington Post, May 25, 1932, p. 5.

[67] “France Says Hoover Has Fewer Than He,” Boston Globe, May 25, 1932, p. 13.

[68] “France Not to Get 11 Votes of Dakota,” Boston Globe, May 29, 1932, p. A5.

[69] “Delegate Choosing Pauses for a Week,” New York Times, May 30, 1932, p. 11.

[70] “Delegate Fight in Both Parties Draws to Close,” Chicago Tribune, May 30, 1932, p. 2.

[71] Griffin, Gerald, “The Growth of Our Primary System,” Baltimore Sun, June 5, 1932, p. SS3.

[72] Brown, Parke, “G.O.P. Scouts Hear Strong Repeal Cry,” Chicago Tribune, June 10, 1932, p. 1.

[73] Douglas, W.A.S., “Dr. France Claims Strategy By Which He’ll Block Hoover,” Baltimore Sun, June 10, 1932, p. 1.

[74] “Oregon Delegate Backs Hoover Despite Vote,” Washington Post, June 10, 1932, p. 2.

[75] “France Only Active Candidate Directing Fight at Chicago,” New York Times, June 13, 1932, p. 10. “France is Only Candidate at Battle Scene,” Chicago Tribune, June 14, 1932, p. 8.

[76] Essary, J.F., “Administration Plank Bans Direct Repeal; Rabid Wets to Fight On,” Baltimore Sun, June 15, 1932, p. 1.

[77] Hart, George L., Official Report of the Proceedings of the Twentieth Republican National Convention (New York: The Tenny Press, 1932), 177.

[78] Hart, Official Report of the Proceedings of the Twentieth Republican National Convention, 179-80.

[79] Henning, Arthur Sears, “Again: Hoover and Curtis,” Chicago Tribune, June 17, 1932, p. 1.

[80] “Police Oust France from the Rostrum,” New York Times, June 17, 1932, p. 14.

[81] Hart, Official Report of the Proceedings of the Twentieth Republican National Convention, 198-99.

[82] “Dr. France Bitter Against Hoover,” Baltimore Sun, June 19, 1932, p. 1.

[83] “Dr. J.I. France Denies Issuing Leaflets on G.O.P. Convention,” Baltimore Sun, August 16, 1932, p. 18.

[84] “Group of Weller Followers Meet,” Baltimore Sun, November 21, 1932, p. 18.

[85] Geoghegan, The Political Career of Joseph I. France, 140.