USA > Colorado > History of Colorado; Volume I > Part 46
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105
In June, 1865, a second effort was made for statehood under the old enabling act of Congress. A better feeling existed and, although there was much oppo- sition, the constitution framed by a convention presided over by W. A. H. Loveland, was carried by a majority of 155. Conventions were held in October of this year by republicans, democrats and the so-called "Sand Creek" faction. This latter was for an emphatic endorsement of the battle of Sand Creek, and bitterly opposed all those who had in any way condemned the soldiers who took part in it. The democrats named Captain William Craig for governor, the re- publicans nominated William Gilpin, with George M. Chilcott for Congress. The
421
HISTORY OF COLORADO
Sand Creek men named Edwin Scudder for governor. The Union men elected their ticket, with exceptions of lieutenant governor and treasurer. The Legis- lature met in Golden City on December 18th, and elected John Evans and Jerome B. Chaffee as senators. The session was brief.
The territorial government was still in force. Governor Evans had resigned and was succeeded by Acting Governor Samuel Elbert, who, on October 19th, was succeeded in office by Alexander Cummings, of Philadelphia. In the bitter controversy that followed, in which the governor opposed the meetings of a "state" legislature and favored the continuation of the Territorial Legislature, which was the only legal law-making power of the territory, the people again took sides for and against statehood, or, as they put it, for or against Cummings.
FAILURE OF STATEHOOD BILLS BY PRESIDENT'S VETO
Congress passed the senate bill providing for the admission of Colorado May 3, 1866. On January 12, 1866, the President had sent the communication notify- ing him of the election of John Evans and Jerome B. Chaffee as senators to Congress, without recommendation. On May 15th the President vetoed the Colorado statehood measure. He charged insufficiency of population, that the burdens of state taxation were too great and finally intimated a fraudulent ma- jority for statehood.
In the next contest for delegate to Congress, Governor Cummings took a deep partisan interest, favoring A. C. Hunt, an anti-statehood candidate, against George M. Chilcott, the republican and statehood nominee.
A. C. Hunt was given the certificate, but Congress later seated George M. Chilcott. When, on April 21st of this year, Cummings resigned the governor- ship he was succeeded by A. C. Hunt.
In February, 1867, Congress again passed a bill for the admission of Colo- rado, but it was again vetoed, and could not be carried over the veto.
On April 15, 1869, Governor Hunt, whose administration had been devoted largely to a settlement of the Indian troubles, was succeeded by Gen. Edward M. McCook, who during the Civil War rose to the brevet rank of major general. The burning question of statehood was still uppermost in the minds of Union party leaders, and they were finally enabled to effect the appointment of Samuel H. Elbert, who succeeded General McCook April 17, 1873.
On January 27, 1874, less than a year after his appointment, the President, without any previous notification, removed Governor Elbert and reappointed General McCook, with John W. Jenkins of Virginia as secretary, taking the place of Frank Hall, and T. B. Searight of Pennsylvania taking the place of Surveyor General Lessig. Jenkins and Searight were confirmed in February and the fight on McCook continued until June 19th, when he too was given the office. This was perhaps one of the most bitter fights ever made on political leaders in territory or state. On McCook's side the Las Animas land deal, growing out of an old Spanish land grant, was made the basis of charges against friends of the removed officials. On the other hand, serious charges were brought against General McCook by the Chaffee faction. On the arrival of the new officials a clean sweep was begun and practically every appointment made at the suggestion of Jerome B. Chaffee, already the republican leader, was annulled. This hos-
422
HISTORY OF COLORADO
tility even extended to Supreme Court appointments, Judge Hallett being re- tained, but Judges E. T. Wells and James B. Belford being succeeded by A. W. Brazee, of Lockport, New York, and Amherst W. Stone, of Colorado. Among the removals was that of Amos Steck, receiver of the Denver land office, and the appointment of Maj. Samuel T. Thomson as his successor followed.
But President Grant strongly favored statehood for Colorado, and in his message to Congress December 3, 1873, urged the enactment of such a measure.
In August, 1874, the republicans and democrats met to name candidates for delegates to Congress. In the republican party the removal of Governor Elbert and associates was the cause of serious dissension. Jerome B. Chaffee declined to run again, but the nominee, Judge H. P. H. Bromwell, was selected to make the race in an effort to bring the factions together.
The democrats had nominated Thomas M. Patterson, who had come to Colo- rado in 1872 from Crawfordsville, Indiana, and who proved to be one of the best campaigners the territory had known. He carried nineteen of the territory's twenty-five counties.
On December 8, 1873, Jerome B. Chaffee, delegate, had introduced the Colo- rado statehood measure. It passed the House June 8, 1874, and was called up in the Senate February 24, 1875. Here began a long and bitter struggle, in which many of the best features of the House bill were eliminated for purely political reasons. Thus, the new state was given for internal improvements 5 per cent of the proceeds of public land sales made subsequent to admission. This was made to apply only to agricultural lands and not to any lands taken up under the homestead laws. Finally all mineral lands were excepted from the operation of the act. These and many other minor changes were all cheerfully agreed to. Then began a venomous fight on the territory, the claim being put forward that it had only a roving population of less than one hundred thousand, that it had no great resources, that its only asset was "scenery." It became clear to the "statehood" leaders that the bill could not be carried by the Senate until General McCook's removal or voluntary resignation. He was finally induced to step down, and Col. John L. Routt, second assistant postmaster-general was named and confirmed as his successor. The bill then had smooth sailing in the Senate. But House concurrence in the Senate amendments was now the occasion for another struggle. There were but a few days left of the session and of the term of Jerome B. Chaffee, who with the help of the leaders of his party was struggling to secure consent of the House for consideration. When the bill came to the House on February 26th it was loaded with the New Mexico meas- ure, and Senator Elkins had been promised that they would not be separated ex- cept in the most extreme emergency.
After the morning hour on March 3d as soon as the deficiency bill had been passed Mr. Haskins, of New York, by previous arrangement, proposed concur- ring in the Senate amendments to House Bill No. 435 (the Colorado statehood measure) and to House Bill No. 2418 (the New Mexico statehood measure). This was defeated. It was now apparent that the bills must be separated and at 8 o'clock Ellis H. Roberts, of Utica, moved the suspension of the rules and con- sideration of bills on the speaker's table, with the understanding that only a two-thirds vote could carry any measure. A few other bills preceded the Colo- rado measure. To the great relief of its friends, it passed, and within a few
423
HISTORY OF COLORADO
minutes carefully enrolled copies, prepared in advance, had been signed by the president of the Senate and speaker of the House. The men who were largely responsible for this success were Jerome B. Chaffee, Thomas M. Patterson, who as a democrat and delegate-elect was urging members of his party to support the measure, Jasper D. Ward, of Chicago, "Sunset" Cox, of New York, James G. Blaine, then the speaker of the House, and a great host of other republicans and democrats.
THOMAS M. PATTERSON TELLS OF WINNING STATEHOOD
The late Senator Patterson, a few years before his death, told the inside story of the action taken by the House. His article in the Jubilee edition of the Rocky Mountain News follows :
"The first session of the Forty-third Congress commenced on the first Mon- day in December, 1873. Very shortly after it convened Mr. Chaffee and Hon. Stephen B. Elkins, who had been elected delegate from the Territory of New Mexico to the Forty-third Congress, determined to make a united effort for the admission of both Colorado and New Mexico into the Union. They were both men of great social and political influence in Washington, particularly Mr. Chaf- fee, who was not only considerably older than Mr. Elkins, but was also then a much wealthier man, with a wider and more influential political acquaintance. They were both republicans, and determined to make the admission of the two territories a party measure, the reason being that the republicans were in a decided majority in the Senate and the House, and they knew it would require party pressure to induce many Eastern members and senators to vote for the admission of any new states. They were certain that, could it be made a caucus measure, there were republicans enough, and to spare, in both branches to give the territories statehood.
"Whether the republicans did make their admission a caucus measure I never learned with positiveness, but it was understood at the time the bills were intro- duced that the republicans of both Houses would, with practical unanimity, sup- port the measure.
"The bills were introduced into the House at the same time, and were re- ferred to the committee on territories. They were both reported back to the House with favorable recommendations at the same time, and the House passed both bills at the same time, and with practically the same vote.
"After their passage by the House both went over to the Senate at the same time, and were referred to the committee on territories.
"This all occurred at the first session of the Forty-third Congress, in the early part of the year 1874, and though that session held well into the summer of that year, the bills were allowed to slumber in the committee without action. Not that the friends of the measure in the Senate didn't urge action, but a ma- jority of the committee were in no hurry then, as they have never been since, to accelerate the admission of new states into the sisterhood.
"That was the situation when I was elected delegate in the summer of 1874. The second session of the Forty-third Congress would convene in December, 1874, and since the session must end on the 4th of March, 1875, and all measures uncompleted at that time must totally fail, I made up my mind to go to Wash-
424
HISTORY OF COLORADO
ington immediately after New Year of 1875, to add whatever influence I could bring to bear in behalf of the measures.
"When I reached Washington the bills were yet with the Senate committee on territories, but Messrs. Chaffee and Elkins succeeded in having them favorably reported back by the committee shortly afterward. The measures went to the Senate calendar, there to remain fixtures until that body could be moved to take action upon them.
"I was assigned by Messrs. Chaffee and Elkins to labor with democratic sen- ators and members-not with a brass band, but quietly, for I was to convince them as well as I could that Colorado would in all probability cast its electoral vote in 1876 for the democratic nominees for President and Vice President. The republicans had practically made the admission of these two states a party meas- ure. The democrats, for that reason, lined themselves up almost solidly in op- position, although the social influences of Chaffee and Elkins had brought a few democrats to their support.
"On the other hand, I had just been elected as a democrat to the House by a good, large majority, and with that as my groundwork, I urged upon democrats that Colorado was more likely to vote for the democratic nominees in 1876 than for the republican; in any event, the chances were even, and justice demanded that the two territories should be admitted.
"I had several interviews with Senator Allen G. Thurman of Ohio shortly after I reached Washington. One of them was at his home, to which he invited me, that we might be undisturbed during the interview.
"I found Senator Thurman quite disposed to be friendly to the clamoring territories, and after this latter interview I knew he would do all he could to have them admitted.
"But the Senate could not be induced to act at all until about two weeks be- fore the close of the session, and then the reason for the tedious delay became apparent. It was to amend the bills at so late a day in the session that, in all human probability, the House would not be permitted to act upon them at all.
"Those were the days of the filibuster, and Samuel J. Randall, a past grand master in the art of filibustering, was the democratic leader in the House.
"The senators who were opposed to new states expected that when the two bills were returned to the House with the Senate's amendments they would, as was the rule in such cases, be referred to the House committee on territories, in which body action might be altogether deferred; or, if it has had, and the bills were reported back favorably, then they would have to go to the calendar, where they were likely to be smothered in the rush of measures in the closing days of the session ; or, should they come to the front, a good, strong show of filibustering against them would end their careers.
"The Senate passed both bills, but before doing so amended them in four or five minor particulars. Not one of the amendments was important, but it was necessary to amend them to carry out the plans of the senatorial cabal that was opposed to the admission of new states.
"Upon their passage by the Senate the friends of the two ambitious terri- tories went into consultation. They knew the dangers that beset them, should the regular course be adopted-that of referring them to the House committee on territories-so a desperate remedy was resorted to as the alternative. The
425
HISTORY OF COLORADO
friends agreed that, instead of referring them to the committee, they would have them laid, in parliamentary language, 'upon the speaker's table.' The en- emies of statehood were quite willing that they should be given that chute, for it would require a two-thirds vote of the House to take them from the table to ratify the Senate amendments and pass the bills as then amended. But on send- ing them to the speaker's table the shoals and quicksands of the committee, and the deadly perils of a filibuster in the very last days of the session, were all avoided.
"The work now before the friends of statehood was to make certain of the necessary two-thirds vote whenever the bills should be called up. My real labor commenced then. A certain number of democratic congressmen had to be won over, and I made myself quite busy. I'm afraid some of the democrats felt that I was something of a nuisance, but I persevered, and bottled my pride, deter- mined that, if failure occurred, it should not be traced to want of effort upon my part.
"Of course, Messrs. Chaffee and Elkins kept their republican friends right in line, but they did not have the republicans solidly, nor did the republicans have the House by the necessary two-thirds vote.
"About a week before the close of the session, however, we were able to count the necessary two-thirds, and the friends of the measure were ready for action.
"But right then there occurred an unlooked-for and very disquieting event. It put the plans of statehood up in the air very badly, and it lost statehood to New Mexico and took some of the votes from Colorado it would otherwise have had.
"What was called a 'force bill' had passed the Senate and was before the House. Sam Randall was leading the democrats in a filibustering struggle to defeat it. The feeling upon both sides was bitter in the extreme.
"Fiery speeches had been made; the Southern democrats drew the line of personal friendships along the debate. They believed they were fighting to preserve their states and homes from negro domination, and those familiar with the feeling of the South, where carpet-bag rule and negro domination were in the balance, can judge of the bitterness of that feeling.
"There was a young republican congressman in the House from Michigan. He was then unknown to fame, except that a rumor from the wilds of Michigan set him down as a Columbian orator of prodigious carrying power. His name was Julius Caesar Burroughs.
"Mr. Burroughs made a speech on the force bill. He grilled the Southerners from head to foot, and tortured them in the fires of his oratory.
"It was a bitter, exasperating speech, and the Southerners listened with gleam- ing eyes and gritting teeth. Burroughs closed with a flood of invective that brought republicans and democrats to their feet, and as he sat down the repub- lican side and the galleries burst out with hand-clapping and applause.
"Mr. Elkins came into the chamber about five minutes before Mr. Burroughs closed his speech. He entered it through a door very close to the desk from which Mr. Burroughs was speaking. He was immediately attracted by the or- ator, and stood as if spellbound, listening to him. He was manifestly carried away by the fervor and swelling voice and earnest manner of Burroughs, and
426
HISTORY OF COLORADO
when Burroughs closed he rushed up to him, and was the very first to shake him by the hand and congratulate him upon the mastery of his effort. Scores of other members gathered about Burroughs' seat and shook his hand, but Elkins was the very first.
"Fatal enthusiasm! The fervor of Columbian oratory would not move the experienced and self-poised Elkins today to so foolish an act-foolish, I mean, having in mind the admission of a state or any other matter of half the import- ance.
"The democrats-particularly the Southern ones, those who had been won over to Colorado and New Mexico statehood-witnessed Elkins' rush for Bur- roughs and his congratulations with set teeth and ominous mutterings. That evening it was known that a number of them who had been counted friends of statehood would vote against New Mexico, at least, and Colorado might possibly be included in their wrath.
"We all set about fixing up the dislodged fences, but how well the work was done could not be told until the votes were actually recorded. I had been a witness of it all-had seen Mr. Elkins when he entered the chamber, saw him stand as if rooted to the floor, saw him rush up the very first to congratulate Burroughs, and felt intuitively that the delegate from New Mexico had com- mitted a fatal blunder. I was not mistaken.
"I will never forget the event of that final vote on the bills for the admission of Colorado and New Mexico. It was 2 o'clock in the morning of the last day of the session-March 4th. James G. Blaine was speaker of the House. He was not in the chair in the early part of the night, nor until after midnight. He had been an honored guest at some important function. He entered the chamber at between 12 and I o'clock, clothed in full evening dress, just as he had left the fashionable dinner function.
"It then became a mere question as to when the votes might be taken. Some matters of perhaps greater importance even than statehood had to be gotten out of the way.
"At length Speaker Blaine was ready for the test. He was the friend of statehood, and he was to determine the most propitious moment for the effort. He gave the signal to the member who was to make the necessary motion, and he arose in response to the call.
"'Mr. Speaker,' he said, and Blaine recognized him.
"It was understood that the test should come on Colorado first.
"'I move,' said the recognized member, in a loud, clear voice, 'that the bill for the admission of Colorado, with the amendments of the Senate, be taken from the speaker's table, that the amendments of the Senate be concurred in, and that the bill as amended do pass.'
"Immediately there was a loud demand by the democrats for the ayes and noes, and the speaker, ruling that the demand was seconded by a sufficient num- ber, ordered the clerk to proceed with the calling of the roll.
"Would Colorado receive the requisite two-thirds vote? That question, and the uncertainty of the answer, caused several hearts in that great chamber almost to cease beating. The whole House was still as the roll call proceeded, for in- terest in the matter had grown to be intense-the friends and opponents of statehood hoped for and expected the victory.
427
HISTORY OF COLORADO
"It was not until after the roll call of nearly three hundred and fifty members had been completed that those who followed the count knew that Colorado had won the day, or, rather, the night.
"As was usually the case on roll calls, a number had not voted when their names were called, and after the call had been completed, those, each in his turn, stood by his seat to be recognized by the speaker, and when his name was called by the clerk he announced his vote and had it recorded. It was only then, after a proceeding that required more than thirty-five minutes, that the friends of Colorado statehood knew that its future was assured. It then but required the signature of the President, the adoption of a state constitution and a final procla- mation by the President, when Colorado would be an equal with the rest of the states in the Union, to work out its own destiny under the aegis of the Consti- tution-a Constitution that knows no favorites, and that protects and defends its children all alike.
"But what of New Mexico?
"Immediately on the announcement of the Colorado vote by Speaker Blaine -it was the necessary two-thirds, with five or six to spare-the member who had moved in the Colorado bill made the same motion as to the New Mexico measure. A roll call was demanded and ordered, and the roll was called. As it was being proceeded with it was noted that now and then a democrat who had voted for Colorado voted against New Mexico. Would there be enough to change the Colorado outcome? There was! Those who followed the call knew that enough such votes had been cast to defeat New Mexico, and even before those not voting and who asked to have their votes recorded had been accom- modated, it was known that New Mexico was not yet to become a state.
"It failed to obtain the necessary two-thirds by less than Colorado had re- ceived above it."
Governor Routt came to Colorado as a peace maker. This appointment had healed the breach between General Grant and Colorado's republican leaders, and after being sworn in by Judge Hallett on March 30, 1875, he began the work of reconciling the factions of his party in the territory.
To win it was evident that there must be unanimity in the republican party, for at the last election for the Territorial Legislature, September 14, 1875, the democrats had elected nine members of the Senate, the republicans four; and of the House ten were democrats and sixteen were republicans. The delegates to the constitutional convention, twenty-four republicans and fifteen democrats, were elected October 25th, and began their labors in Denver December 20th. The constitution framed by this body of men was ratified July 1, 1876. The vote was: For the constitution, 15,443; against the constitution, 4,062.
On August Ist President Grant issued his proclamation declaring Colorado a state of the Union.
FIRST STATE ELECTION
When the State of Colorado held its first party conventions there was really no clear-cut test vote at hand by which to gange the political complexion of the entire commonwealth. During the war and in the few years after the war the legislative elections had been controlled to some extent by "North" or "South"
428
HISTORY OF COLORADO
sentiments, but to a large extent by purely local and territorial issues. The question of statehood, for and against, had divided the territory into factions in which democrats and republicans forgot old party fealties in the bitterness of their present contest.
So it was decided to have a test vote and both parties named their strongest candidates. The fight for the Supreme Court judgeships was a peculiar and interesting one. Judge Wells had just formed a partnership at Leadville, which meant a fortune to him yearly. But he was the strongest candidate the repub- licans could name, so he was finally, and much against his will, nominated with the understanding that he would resign immediately after the election. The republican ticket was elected, and Judge Wells assisted in the organization of the Supreme Court. In deciding on terms Judge Wells, much to his chagrin, drew the long term. He was, however, permitted to resign.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.