Maryland 1808 Electoral College, District 4

Office:
Electoral College (Federal)
Title:
Elector
Jurisdiction:
Federal
Label:
Maryland 1808 Electoral College, District 4
Date:
1808
State:
Maryland
Type:
General
Iteration:
First Ballot
Office/Role:
Electoral College/Elector
Electors:
John Tyler, Nathaniel Rochester, Roger Taney, John Lynn, David Brumbach, Christian Fechtic
Electors: John Tyler[1]Nathaniel Rochester[2]Roger TaneyJohn LynnDavid BrumbachChristian Fechtic
Affiliation:RepublicanRepublicanFederalistFederalist
Presidential Candidate:James MadisonJames MadisonCharles C. PinckneyCharles C. Pinckney
Final Result: 435543523889388711
District of Four[3]435543523889388711
Allegany County359359484484--
District of One332929--
District of Two55554646--
District of Three79797777--
District of Four61616969--
District of Five122122148148--
District of Six3939115115--
Frederick County[4]2471246823412339--
District of One8383214214--
District of Two[5]472472242243--
District of Three[6]518517249248--
District of Four170170187187--
District of Five200200153153--
District of Six174172350348--
District of Seven464464203203--
District of Eight218218500500--
District of Nine172172243243--
Washington County[7][8][9]152515251064106411
District of Fiery's[10]2242242525--
Town of Hagerstown[11][12]943943233233--
Town of Hancock[13][14]6566102102--
Town of Sharpsburg[15]8484577577--
Stovers[16][17]209209127127--

Notes:

[1]Elected.
[2]Elected.
[3]The November 24th edition of the Republican Advocate lists 4356 votes for John Tyler and 4353 votes for Nathaniel Rochester.
[4]The November 22nd edition of the Whig lists 2241 votes for Roger Taney and 2239 votes for John Lynn.
[5]The Whig (Baltimore, MD) lists Lynn as receiving 245 votes.
[6]The November 22nd edition of the Whig lists 259 votes for Roger Taney and 258 votes for John Lynn.
[7]The November 22nd edition of the Federal Gazette, the The Virginia Argus (Richmond, VA), the November 17th and 24th edition of the Republican Advocate and the November 23rd edition of the North America lists 1526 votes for John Tyler and Nathaniel Rochester.
[8]Returns lists in the November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post are not complete. They lists 991 votes for John Tyler, 990 votes for Nathaniel Rochester, 532 votes for Roger Taney and 532 votes for John Lynn.
[9]"In Washington county, the republican Ticket had a majority of 462; and in Frederick a majority of 130 votes." Republican Star or Eastern Shore General Advertiser (Easton, MD). November 29, 1808.
[10]The November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post lists 199 votes for John Tyler and 199 votes for Nathaniel Rochester.
[11]The November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post lists 710 votes for John Tyler and 709 votes for Nathaniel Rochester.
[12]The November 17th edition of the Republican Advocate and the November 18th edition of the Maryland Herald both report 942 votes for Nathaniel Rochester.
[13]The November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post lists 37 votes for Roger Taney and 37 votes for John Lynn.
[14]The November 17th edition of the Republican Advocate reports 66 votes for Tyler and 67 for Rochester.
[15]The November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post lists 495 votes for Roger Taney and 495 votes for John Lynn.
[16]Also referred to as Langley's.
[17]The November 19th of the Whig and the November 18th edition of the Evening Post lists 82 votes for John Tyler and 82 votes for Nathaniel Rochester.

References:

Original Election Returns. Maryland State Archives, Annapolis.
American, and Commercial Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 15, 1808.
The North American and Mercantile Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 15, 1808.
Republican Star or Eastern Shore General Advertiser (Easton, MD). November 15, 1808.
National Intelligencer and Washington Advertiser (Washington, DC). November 16, 1808.
Republican Advocate (Fredericktown, MD). November 17, 1808.
Baltimore Evening Post (Baltimore, MD). November 18, 1808.
The Maryland Herald, and Hager's-Town Weekly Advertiser (Hagerstown, MD). November 18, 1808.
National Intelligencer and Washington Advertiser (Washington, DC). November 18, 1808.
Baltimore Evening Post (Baltimore, MD). November 19, 1808.
The Whig (Baltimore, MD). November 19, 1808.
American, and Commercial Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 21, 1808.
National Intelligencer and Washington Advertiser (Washington, DC). November 21, 1808.
The North American and Mercantile Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 21, 1808.
Federal Gazette and Baltimore Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 22, 1808.
Republican Star or Eastern Shore General Advertiser (Easton, MD). November 22, 1808.
The Virginia Argus (Richmond, VA). November 22, 1808.
The Whig (Baltimore, MD). November 22, 1808.
The North American and Mercantile Daily Advertiser (Baltimore, MD). November 23, 1808.
Republican Advocate (Fredericktown, MD). November 24, 1808.
The Virginia Argus (Richmond, VA). November 25, 1808.
National Intelligencer and Washington Advertiser (Washington, DC). November 28, 1808.
Republican Star or Eastern Shore General Advertiser (Easton, MD). November 29, 1808.
Willis, John T. Presidential Elections in Maryland. Mt. Airy, MD: Lomond Publications, 1984. 164.

Page Images

handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).
handwritten notes
Phil's original notebook pages that were used to compile this election. These notes are considered a draft of the electronic version. Therefore, the numbers may not match. To verify numbers you will need to check the original sources cited. Some original source material is available at the American Antiquarian Society).

These election records were released on 11 January 2012. Versions numbers are assigned by state. Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia are complete and are in Version 1.0. All other states are in a Beta version. For more information go to the about page.