History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time, Part 169

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas
Number of Pages: 1340

USA > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago > History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time > Part 169

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).

" This was the first anti-slavery meeting, if it may be called such, held in Chicago, of which there is any recollection. The men who were present became prominent afterward in the anti-slavery history of Chi- cago. The men who were willing to be known as abo- litionists, soon after this event, were mainly a nucleus that formed around the First Presbyterian church, embracing a few individuals who were Methodists or Baptists; but in almost every instance they were pro- fessing Christians, who were led to take a stand by the death of Lovejoy, Here was the beginning of that anti- slavery sentiment that became a power in Chicago, and made that city distinguished throughout the country as one that proved itself a law-abiding community by shel- tering and protecting the fugitive slave against illegal arrest."

The date of this first meeting is not given; probably in 1838.

September 3, 1839, the Chicago Colonization Society was organized.

January 16, 1840, the Chicago Anti-Slavery Society held its first public meeting at the Saloon Building. The officers were: President, Henry Smith; vice-presidents, Ira Miltimore, George Foster, and J. Johnston; secre- tary, Calvin DeWolf; treasurer, George Manierre. Reso- lutions were offered, and, with slight amendments, adopted, by Rev. Isaac T. Hinton, Rev. Flavel Bascom and Charles Durant, favoring the adoption of some plan for the peaceable abolition of slavery throughout the world, and denouncing the " Black Code " of Illinois.

December 25, 1840, there was published in the Chi- cago American, a petition to the State Legislature, praying it to remove from the Illinois statutes those laws known collectively as the " Black Code " which prevented negroes from testifying against whites, and which permitted any white man to cause any black man to be thrown into jail who did not show his papers of freedom.

The Liberty Party abolitionist held a State con- vention at Chicago, May 27, 1842, to nominate candi- dates for State officers: Governor, Lieutenant-Govern- or, etc. This was the first State Convention ever hekl in the city.

It does not appear that these early abolition efforts made any perceptible impression on the Democratic majority or the Whig minority until the issue took a national form. But the leaven worked fast. In 1844, when, for the first time the abolitionists had a national ticket in the field Chicago gave 209 votes for Birney, the presidential candidate. Out of a popular vote of

2,615,855, b .... ey received only 62,263 votes. Of these, the State of Illinois gave 3,570, and the little city of Chicago 209. Numerically the vote was insignificant, but comparatively it stamped Chicago at that early day as a hot-bed of abolitionism, where lived an uncompro- mising and undismayed set of radicals, whose strength was not to be despised. .

The anti-slavery sentiment of the city was still more plainly discernable in the presidential election of 1848, when the Democratic party divided on the issue. Then, the anti-slavery sentiment was expressed by a vote of 1,543 for Van Buren.

The anti-slavery Democrats were again whipped into the party traces in 1848, but the incorrigible anti- slavery sentiment in Chicago and Cook County asserted itself in a vote of 793 in the county and 424 in the city for Hall.

'The succeeding four years brought the contest which had heretofore smouldered under the crust of party politics to an eruptional crisis. During the period from 1848 to 1852, the whole nation had become stirred to its utmost political depths by national legislation which made it patent to the Northern mind that the North were not longer to be neutral in the propagan- dism of slavery in the Republic.

'The passage of the fugitive-slave law, a part of the compromise measures of 1850, although accepted by both the old parties as a law to be observed and exe- cuted, met a most determined opposition thoughout the North, and, although there was no political party, save the little revolutionary knot of abolitionists opposed to the law, it could not be enforced in Chicago, nor in any other considerable city in the North, without a popular outbreak, which showed plainly that a conscientious sense of inherent right was becoming so potent that party discipline could no longer restrain it. There was great excitement in Chicago on the receipt of news that the fugitive slave bill had been passed. Septem- ber 18, 1850.)

On October 11, the colored people, in convention assembled resolved, " not to fly to Canada," but, "to remain and defend themselves." On the 21st, the Com- mon Council 'a Democratic Council) passed a resolu- tion that "the city police would not be required to aid in the recovery of slaves." On the 22d, a great mass-meeting of citizens was held, which, by resolutions condemned the law, and defied its enforcement in Chicago.

Stephen A. Douglas had been a most ardent sup- porter of the compromise measures. He had become a resident of Chicago in 1847, and had, through his influence, made the city of his residence the terminus of the Illinois Central system of railroads, thus largely increasing its commercial prosperity and importance. His popularity in Chicago as a citizen and as a politician, was at this time at its height. His power over his home constituency was never shown in a stronger light than at this time. In October, 1850, he returned to Chicago, where he found, even among his political friends, the measures generally unpopular, and, in the Democratic papers, even, assailed with great bitterness. On the 24th of that month he made, in Chicago, what has been deemed the ablest speech of his life, in which he defended the principles of the compromise bill, includ- ing the fugitive-slave bill, in a manner so masterly .1- to silence, if it did not convince the insubordinate ele- ments of his own party. In this speech he enunciated the doctrines on which he framed and defended the Kansas-Nebraska bill, three years later, in the follow- ing words ;

609

POLITICAL HISTORY.

" These measure are predicated on the great funda- mental principle that every people ought to possess the right of framing and regulating their own internal concerns and domestic institutions in their own way.

* * * These things are all confided by the Constitution to each State to decide for itself, and I know of no reason why the same principle should not be extended to the Territories."

Through the influence of Douglas, the Chicago Democracy was re-united and solidified for the last time, as is evinced in the vote of the city and Cook County in 1852, when the united Democracy gave Pierce, the Democratic candidate for President, a vote of two thousand eight hundred and thirty-five in the city, against four hundred and twenty-four for Hall the free-soil candidate.

Douglas's scepter was quite rudely broken before another national election. In 1854, January 30th, Donglas made his great speech in the United States Senate, championing the Kansas-Nebraska bill, which repudiated the compromises which had gone before, and, in the minds of the populace, showed the compro- mises of 1850, including the hated fugitive-slave law, to have been only designed as a subterfuge of the slave power to gain a foothold for further aggression. Doug- las took no backward step. He came to Chicago, as before, to explain to his constituency the questions they did not understand. He found his power gone, and only a small but faithful minority of adherents left. The anti-slavery sentiment had broken all bounds, and could no longer be curbed, even by the eloquence of Douglas. An account of his discomfiture is copied from the Chicago Times, of Sunday, August 19, 1877, it being one of a series of historical articles under the head of "By-Gone Days" which appeared in that paper. Its statements show the extreme color of admira- tion for the hero of the story, but is, nevertheless, deemed to be essentially correct, and is therefore em- bodied in the history. It read as follows :

"No man of his time had so many personal friends and so many bitter political enemies as Stephen A. Dong- las. The former regarded him almost in the light of a prophet, and under his banner would have under- taken any crusade it might have entered his head to preach. The latter in order to maintain an equilibrium. went quite to the other extreme, and regarded the inventor of squatter sovereignty in the light of a Jndas or Beelzebub, devoid of a single pure motive.

" Impartial history has since taken the equation of the Little Giant's character and mental stature, and now declares that he was neither so great as his most enthu- siastic friends believed him to be, nor so fickle and insincere as his enemies portrayed him. He was em- inently a man of action ; a man to exert a powerful influence on his own generation, but as he, by nature, favored compromise principles, had a tendency to trim -not by any means a bad trait in times of public excitement-it was to be expected that he would leave no particular influence behind him. Even the present generation, hearing the old heads talk with abiding interest about Douglas, wonder, when they read his speeches, full of one idea and rather tiring repeti- tion, what there was great in the man to draw other men to him in such magnetic chains ; and another gen- eration, still further removed from personal knowledge and oral reminiscences of the man, will wonder even more. It was Douglas's fault that he was ambitious. It is his glory, that in the supreme moment of his life he had the greatness to sink his disappointment in the welfare of his country, and his chief title to greatness rests on

the fact that he was able to conquer himself, and, with 'a heroic abnegation, place himself by the side of the man who had robbed him of the crown of his consum- ing ambition, to strengthen his arm in fighting his coun- try's foes. The man who could do this was not small, -he was not without principle-and though it does not prove him a great man as to brains, it testifies most eloquently to his greatness of heart.

I " Two causes led to the mobbing of the Little Giant in 1854. Those were Know-nothing days, and the Nebraska excitement-supplemented by the Kansas furore-was coming to a head. That it was a period of turmoil is little matter for wonder. In the one case it wasa question between the native and the foreign born element-a question, in fact, whether the adopted citi- zen had any rights which a native was bound to respect. In the other case it was a struggle between freedom and slavery ; a life-and-death, hand-to-hand struggle then begun, and which came to an end only with the surrender of Lee under the apple tree.

"On the Know-nothing question Douglas took noble and even advanced ground. In fact, he was the first to make war on the proscriptive spirit of the native party, and it was he who marshaled the Democratic party against the hosts of intolerance, fanatism, and political as well as religious bigotry.

"Prior to the throwing of these firebrands into the political establishment of the country, as between Whigs and Democrats, Chicago was strongly Demo- cratic-was a stronghold, in fact. By way of illustrat- ing the Democratic strength of that period, an old set- tler made the remark: 'If the town pump had been nominated for mayor in those days, on the Democratic ticket, it would have been elected. A nomination was always equivalent to an election, and I remember once when Dr. Kimberly, lately deceased, got the Demo- cratic nomination for clerk of some sort, in the Demo- cratic convention that was held in the little old court- house that stood in the northeast corner of the square, he fainted dead away: he was so overpowered by it. You see the nomination gave him a sure thing, and a nomination and election coming that way in one fell swoop is calculated to knock over the strongest, as I happen to know, for I have run for office myself once or twice in my life.'

" But the Democratic party got on a terribly ragged edge in 1854. The Whigs went to pieces, but in their place came an indefinable something that was neither fish, flesh, nor fowl, for a time, and went under the name of 'Fusion.' Everybody . fused' for a time, and 'thosed' over it, but the thing didn't last long, and out of this chaos was born the Republican party.

"When Know-nothingism came, it completely para- lized the Democratic party for a time, and the leaders were afraid to combat it. But Douglas, with his char- acteristic courage-or more properly speaking, pluck- having been invited to deliver a 4th of July address at Philadelphia, accepted on condition that he be allowed to free his mind, and he did so accordingly. On the one hand he went rough-shod for the Know-nothings, and on the other he spoke with enthusiasm for his squat- ter sovereignty, and thus had the entire opposition about his ears. On the one hand this speech had the effect of placing the Democratic party in solid opposition to Know-nothingism; but what he had said about the Ne- braska question so offended the free-soil element in the party that a goodly proportion sloughed off and joined the incoherency known as Fusionists. It was by this free-soil element that Douglas was most bitterly antagonized thereafter, and it was his former supporters

· 610

HISTORY OF CHICAGO.

of this complexion that determined to make it warm for him on his return to Chicago.

"There was at that time a daily paper in Chicago called the Democratic Press. It was edited by John L. Scripps and Hon. William Bross, the latter still surviv- ing. This paper, once Democratic, turned with vindic- tive vehemence on the " Little Giant," and lett no means untried to turn the populace against him. Just at that period the once powerful Democratic party of Chicago was actually scattered to the four winds, and not more than a corporal's guard of true souls could be found to give the little Senator a brave backing#

"But, backing or no backing, the . Little 'Giant ' determined to face the music, and it was announced that shortly after his arrival .in Chicago, after the adjournment of Congress, he would take occasion to address his constituents on the issues of the day, and mayhap make a few personal explanations.

"This was just what the opposition to Douglas dreaded. They knew they had him at an advantage so long as he was a thousand miles away; but face to face, with his persuasive tongue in motion, it was another matter, and they determined at all hazards to thwart his purpose-even though it was at the sacrifice of their own vaunted principle, free speech. ()nce before, in 1850, Douglas had passed under a cloud, but a single speech by him in explanation of his position had placed him in a greater favor than ever. It was this power his enemies dreaded, were determined to nullify, and made arrangements accordingly.

"Congress adjourned about the ist of August. Mr. Douglas left Washington soon after, and reached his home in this city on the 25th. When he arrived here he found a most formidable organization opposed to him, determined to crowd him to the wall at all hazards; and determined even that he should under no circum- stances have an opportunity to address the people, as it was announced he was prepared to do. In this move- ment to oppose violence to free speech the clergy took a prominent part, and from numerous orthodox Prot- estant pulpits, especially of the Methodist and Baptist persuasion, the fiat went forth to the faithful that this anti-Christ must be denied every opportunity to pollute the pure atmosphere of Illinois with his perfidions breath. Not only was this organization and purpose manifest in Chicago, but it was rampant all over the State, and the Know-nothing and free-soil combination was at nearly every point prepared to contest with him the right to address the public, on the plea that he was a public enemy.

" It was on the evening of September 1, 1854, that he was announced to speak at North Market Hall, where now the county building stands. Dan O'Hara says there can be no mistake about the date, because it was his birthday, his thirty-third, and he celebrated it by attending the meeting as one of the " Little Giant's" most ardent admirers.

" As soon as the date was announced earnest prepa- rations began on both sides. On the one hand were incendiary appeals on the part of a reckless, partisan press, calling on the populace to ' thwart the little dema- gogue's' purpose, while on the other there went for- ward determined measures on the part of Mr. Douglas's friends to see fair play and give him muscular backing if need be. But this determination was not widespread throughout the party. It was principally confined to. personal friends-but these tried and true friends.

" Just before the meeting all manner of reckless re- ports were given currency by the opposition pres, one

being to the effect that Mr. Douglas had selected a body guard of five hundred Irishmen who, with arms in their hands, were to be present and compel the peo- ple to silence while he spoke. This story was spread to inflame the Know-nothing element. It is needless to say that it had no foundation in truth, and more's the pity. Such an organization at this time-an organiza- tion to maintain free speech-would have been a most creditable thing, and that some of the leaders of that mob were not shot down in their tracks will ever be matter for regret among all 'liherty-loving and all right- minded folks, even though the mob acted in the abused name of liberty. After the riot, with a view of keeping up the bad blood engendered, a paper declared that ter- rible times might be expected soon, as the friends of the ' Little Giant ' had bought up all the guns and re- volvers in the stores of the city, and had given heavy orders for more. All of which was another lie mann- factured to suit a particular emergency.

" Judge I. L. Milliken was the Mayor of the period -a Democrat in those days-and he was invited and consented to preside at the meeting. The fact that violence was to take place at the gathering was daily impressed upon the public by the opposition press, but with consummate duplicity it was stated that it would be brought about by Douglas, who intended to overawe all disapproval by armed opposition.

"Under such circumstances as these, assembled the meeting on that September cvening. During the after- noon the flags of such shipping as was owned by the most bitter of the Fusionists were hung at half-mast; at dusk the bells of numerous churches tolled with all the doleful solemnity that might be supposed appropriate for some impending calamity. As the evening closed in, crowds flocked to the place of meeting.

"The gathering was on Michigan Street, immedi- ately in front of the old North Market Hall. A great crowd was assembled, and it was plain from the start that a wicked feeling was abroad. A little before S. o'clock Mr. Douglas began to speak. And still the crowd increased. It completely filled up . Michigan Street, east as far as Dearborn, and west as far as Clark. And, besides this, the roofs of opposite houses were covered, and the windows and balconies filled, for the ' Little Giant ' had a way of making himself heard at a great distance.

"The Senator had spoken but a few minutes when it became apparent that there was an element present that was not disposed to hear him. On the questioning of some statement of the speaker by a person in the crowd the rumpus began in earnest, and for a matter of two hours a juvenile pandemonium sported at a white rage all around that Old Market Hall. First hisses were in order. The Senator paused until silence was com- paratively restored, when he told the meeting that he came there to address his constituents, and he in- tended to be heard. He was instantly assailed by all manner of epithets. Every name that vile tongue could invent was hurled at him. In a moment he was sur- rounded by a howling, raging mob, hungry to do him personal injury. But, all undaunted, he fearlessly faced the enemy, at the same time keeping down a little com- pany of friends on the platform, who were all eagerness to resent the insults and affronts so brutally heaped upon their idol. Mr. Douglas appealed to the latter to be calm; to leave him to deal with the mob before him. He boldly denounced the violence exhibited as a pre- concerted thing, and in defiance of yells, groans, cat- calls, and every insulting menace and threat, he read

611

POLITICAL HISTORY.

aloud, so that it was heard above the infernal din, a let- ter informing him that if he dared to speak he would be maltreated.

" The Senator's biographer, Mr. Sheahan, alludes as follows to the affair: 'We never saw such a scene be- fore, and hope never to see the like again. *

* * Until ten o'clock he stood firm and unyielding, bidding the mob defiance, and occasionally getting in a word or two upon the general subject. It was the penalty for his speech in Philadelphia. It was the penalty for having made the first assault upon Know-nothingism. It was the penalty for having dared to assail an order including within its members a vast majority of the allied opposition of the Western States. We have conversed since then with men who were present at that mob; with men who went there as members of the order, pledged to stand by and protect each other; with men who were armed to the teeth in anticipation of a scene of bloody violence, and they have assured us that noth- ing prevented bloodshed that night but the bold and defiant manner in which Douglas maintained his ground. Had he exhibited fear, he would not have commanded respect; had he been craven, and entreated, his party would in all probability have been assaulted with missiles, leading to violence in return. But, standing there before that vast inob, presenting a determined front and unyielding purpose, he extorted an involun- tary admiration from those of his enemies who had the courage to engage in a personal encounter; and that admiration, while it could not overcome the purpose of preventing his being hcard, protected him from personal violence. The motive, the great ruling reason, for refusing him the privilege of being heard, was that, as he had in 1850 carried the judgment of the people captive into an indorsement of the fugitive-slave law, so, if allowed to speak in 1854, he would at least rally all Democrats to his support by his defense of the . Nebraska bill. The combined fanatics of Chicago feared the power and effect of his argument in the presence and hearing of the people. They therefore resolved that he should not be heard. So far as this occasion was concerned, the object was successfully attained, and if there were any doubts as to the fact that the course agreed upon had been previously con- certed, the experience of the following few weeks served to remove all question on that head.'

"It was reported at the time, especially by and among those who were not present, that the Little Giant' was pelted with rotten eggs. This feature is now called in question by most trustworthy witnesses, who substitute rotten apples. Perhaps, as between rotten eggs and rotten apples, there is not much choice of flavor, but the Sunday Times historian agrees with Uncle Dan ()'Hara that the veracity of history is ahove every other consideration, and he, having been one of the eye-witnesses aforesaid, falls in line on the rotten- apple side of this controversy.

" It was a brave little band that stood by the side of the . Little Giant' in that hour of peril, and but for his restraining influence, though but few in numbers, it is more than likely they would have left their mark upon the mob. Some have since gone where it is to be hoped mob spirit is unknown since the rebellion of Satan, but others are still among the living. Of this little band were Ilon. Frank C. Sherman, General Hart I. Stewart, Cornelius and William Price, Tom Mackin, Elihu Granger, Dan MeElroy, Dan O'Hara, Colonel Dick Hamilton and Elisha Tracy.

" This band clung to the lion-hearted Senator to the last . For two hours they stood like a solid wall back of

him, and when, after a vain and protracted effort to be heard, Mr. Douglas finally succumbed to the inevitable, and prepared to leave the rostrum, they formed a stanch phalanx about his carriage, and proceeded to march with their charge toward the hotel. Hooting and yelling. the mob followed up to Clark-street bridge. It was a fortunate circumstance that as soon as the Douglas party had got across the bridge-tender had sense enough to turn the bridge, and thus the greater part of the mob were unable to continue their pursuit. In time the Senator was safely ensconced in his hotel, the Tre- mont House.

" A month or two later Mr. Douglas was invited by his political friends in this city to partake of a public dinner, and he accepted the invitation. The 9th of November was selected for the time, and on that even- ing some two hundred gentlemen sat down to a dinner at the Tremont House. In response to a complimentary sentiment, Mr. Douglas addressed the company in a speech which was substantially the address which he would have made to the people in 'September, had he not been prevented by the mob.

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.

History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time, Part 169

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore Publication date: 1884 Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas Number of Pages: 1340

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas
Number of Pages: 1340