USA > Indiana > A history of Indiana from its exploration to 1850 > Part 39
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
1 Auditor's report, in Laws of Indiana, 1840, 228.
2 Treasurer's report, in Laws of Indiana, 1840, 236.
463
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
seven bills providing for a complete reorganization of the fiscal policy and machinery of the State.3
The first was entitled a "Bill to Value the Property of the State."4 The law directed that the county assessor, an officer created by the third bill of the list, to appraise the real and personal property of the State at its cash value. On this basis the State and county governments were to make tax levies. County and State boards of equalization were provided for. The second bill, when enacted into law, established the offices of county and State auditors to be filled by popular election.5 The fourth bill defined the county treasurer's duties; the fifth pointed out the mode of making tax levies ; the sixth subjected the private stock in the State Bank to taxation the same as any other prop- erty; the seventh directed a levy of forty cents to meet the interest on the State debt.6
This revolution in the taxing system was accomplished by the Whig Party. A minority of about twenty-five rep- resentatives opposed all the measures. In the "Address of the Democratic Members of the Legislature," dated Febru- ary 13, 1841, the measures were hotly denounced.7 The prosperous condition of the State in 1834 was contrasted with the dismal outlook in 1840. The annual running ex- penses of the State in 1834 were given as $30,000; in 1840 they had mounted to $840,000. There was nothing to show for the expenditure except a few lines of stagnant pools and a bitter experience.
The Whigs assured the taxpayers that the levy of forty cents would pay all the State debt. The fund commission- ers likewise gave it as their opinion that the levy would soon put the State finances on a sound foundation.
The law, which is still in substance on the statute books, was good, but the party that placed it on the statute book
3 House Journal, 1840, 306.
4 Laws of Indiana, 1840, ch. I.
5 Laws of Indiana, 1840, ch. II.
6 Laws of Indiana, 1840, chs. I to IX inclusive.
7 Vincennes Western Sun, Mar. 6, 1841. "The time has come for the people to take a hand. Demagogues, temporizers, gambling politicians must be put down. Is liberty worth such a tax?"
464
HISTORY OF INDIANA
was never given complete power again in the State. By one of those inexplicable turns in popular government public opinion grasped the Whig party, internal improve- ments, the high tax, and the ruined State, all in a single thought which neither fact nor argument seemed able to alter. Public opinion, as is usual, was right. The Whig Party had had complete control of the State government at least since 1834. During that time taxes had increased eight-fold.8 The party was guilty of flagrant misgovern- ment. Its punishment was not unmerited.9 .
The Democrats had found a vulnerable spot in the Whig political coat which they never failed to take advantage of. It made little different what the Whigs proposed or what argument they adduced in its support, the sufficient politi- cal answer was "internal improvements." During the ses- sion of the General Assembly of 1841-42, a series of articles appeared in the Indiana State Journal on the subject of the general responsibility for the internal improvements pol- icy.10 The author, who was thoroughly conversant with the facts, made it clear that many prominent Democrats were supporters of the policy, but he failed to acquit his own party. The Whig Party, having lost its spirit, had become a vast host, unorganized, reposing on their arms, their leaders fallen or deserted. Many who had formerly taken a fighting interest became sullen and disgusted, "stung with regrets" as an editor put it, and gave no more
8 For a clear indictment of the Whig Party see an address by Robert Dale Owen to the "Citizens of Posey county," August, 1841; published in the Indiana State Sentinel, October 11, and in the Western Sun, No- vember 13. "Our State debt has run up in six years to one-tenth of all our property. Our tax is eight times as high as it was six years ago. Our bonds are hawked about at half price like those of a bankrupt. Our check for interest is dishonored. All is lost, save honor, and it is for- feited."
9 The following election gave the Democrats fifty-six representatives and the Whigs forty-four. The voters complained that they had to pay 9 per cent. interest on their mortgages when money was worth only 6. The financial question was finally settled by the "Butler Bill." See chapter on "Internal Improvements." Indiana Journal, Aug. 28, 1841; Western Sun, Sept. 4, 1841.
10 Indiana Journal, January and February, 1842.
465
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
attention to politics.11 The whole period from 1840 to 1846 was one of distress in Indiana. It was the long reaction after the debauch. The farmers pulled themselves together and plied their trade in dogged silence. Their pride as well as their prosperity was gone.
A committee of Whig members of the General Assembly at the close of the session issued a long, well-written ad- dress, but not even the eloquence of Theodore Barnett nor the sound sense of John D. Defrees could make much im- pression.12 "Amid the ruin and desolation which surround the Hoosier affairs, they have only one thing to be proud of, and that is their supreme bench. This is an ornament to American jurisprudence," remarked Pleasant Hackle- man, editor of the Rushville Whig.13
The Democrats played a waiting game. The salaries of the State officials were reduced, useless offices were abol- ished, and the bankrupt State government relieved of every burden possible.14 The thoughts of the people, long cen- tered on the activity of the State, were gradually directed into other channels. The schools, the churches, the benevo- lent institutions, agricultural societies, labor unions, num- berless organizations for the betterment of society, the pro- tection of the unfortunate and the innocent, began to re- ceive systematic attention and support.
The influx of settlers and especially of workmen on the canal had seriously demoralized society. This was not no- ticed, or perhaps the vicious element did not assert itself,
11 Indianapolis Daily Journal, Jan. 5 and 7, 1842.
12 Indianapolis Daily Journal, Jan. 18, 1842.
13 Indianapolis Daily Journal, June 7, 1842.
14 "Our investigation into frauds of the system will exhibit a scene of villainy, fraud and corruption, scarcely, if ever, equaled in the annals of any country. We have appointed a special agent to close up these 'splendid financial operations,' to sue delinquent officers and recover what is possible. Most have been sanctioned by law. We have also discharged that whole horde of blood suckers, the boards of commis- sioners and engineers. In the actions of that most unfortunate and designing conclave of men, the people will discern in bold relief the workings of that aristocratic policy which had its paternity in Alex- ander Hamilton and the elder Adams." John W. Davis in "Democratic Address to the Voters" at close of the session of General Assembly of 1842. Published in Western Sun March 5.
466
HISTORY OF INDIANA
so long as times were flush. But with the pinching years of 1839 and 1840 many persons, thrown out of employment, were forced to the hard choice between the miseries of ex- treme poverty and vice. What the newspapers called a wave of crime swept over the State. A Marion county grand jury, in its report to the court, solemnly pronounced the taverns asylums of immorality and crime rather than places of rest and refreshment for travelers. The recent General Assembly had required all liquor retailers to secure a county license. The law had the effect of concentrating the drinking as well as the drunkards in the taverns. With the drinkers came their parasites, the gamblers and the prostitutes. The report of the grand jury awakened the capital like a fire alarm.15 Seven days after the report was made public, the citizens met in mass meeting. The cen- sure of the grand jury was discussed, and it was decided that it was not wide of the truth. Immediate action was demanded. Under the law the voters had a right, by ma- jority remonstrance, to keep the county commissioners from issuing a liquor license. A remonstrance was drawn up and quickly signed by 224 of the 364 eligible voters of the town. In less than three hours the whole work had been accomplished, barring saloons from the town for three years.16
ยง 93 CAMPAIGN OF 1844
THE election of 1840 closed the period of personal poli- tics in Indiana.17 Men of all parties had united to elect Harrison. Among his supporters there was little cohesion except what was furnished by the personality of the Presi- dent. How helpless the Whigs were is shown by their con- dition after the death of their leader. Under the lead of Clay a bill for a new United States Bank was prepared and rushed through Congress. In due time it reached President Tyler, who promptly attached his veto.
The breach produced by the quarrel between Clay and
15 The report is given in the Indiana Journal, May 29, 1841.
16 Indiana Journal, June 18, 1841. This meeting was held June 5. It was presided over by Samuel Merrill, president of the State Bank.
17 Adam Leonard, "The Period of Personal Politics in Indiana." Mss.
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
467
St. Joseph
EIkhart
Steuben
Laporte
1
Lagrange
Porter
Lake
Dekalb
Marshall
Noble
5
Starke
NINT Jasper
H Pulaski
Fulton
Wabash
Miami
Cass
Adams
White
Wells
Benton
Carroll
E
L
E
LENI
Howard
Grant
Black fford
Jay
Warren
Tippecanoe
Clinton
Tipton
EIG
Hamilton
Boone
Madison
Vermillion
Hancock
Parke
Hend- ricks
Marion
Putnam
SIXTH
Rush
S E
VE
NIH
Shelby
Vigo
Clay
Franklin URTE
Oven
Decatur
Monroe
Brown
Bartholo- mew
Sullivan
Ripley
Greene
Jennings
THIRD Jackson
Lawrence
Switzer- land
IVigo
Jefferson
Daviess
Washington Scott
Orange
SE
Clark
Pike
Dubois
Gibson
Crawford
Floyd)
Van- der- burg
Perry
Harrison
The Democrats car- ried all the dis- tricts except the Fifth in 1852.
Warrick
Posey
Spencer
INDIANA IN 1852. BY E. V. SHOCKLEY.
Fountain
Montgomery
Morgan
Johnson
Dearborn
Martin
Kosciusko
Whitley Made
Huntington
468
HISTORY OF INDIANA
President Tyler extended to Indiana. The officers who en- joyed the presidential patronage maintained a formal alle- giance to the administration. The great majority of the voters, together with the party organization, followed Clay. They denounced the President for what they chose to call his betrayal of the party.
The Democratic Party profited indirectly by the de- moralization of the Whigs, though many of the disaffected went over to that party. The struggle of 1840 eliminated Van Buren, who had come to be the chief liability of the Democratic Party in the West. He had all the weaknesses of Jackson without any of Jackson's strength. Neither party had any leader at the time, who, like Jackson or Har- rison, towered head and shoulders above the multitude. The old issues of the Whig Party, the tariff, internal improve- ments and the bank, the championing of which had given Clay his hold on the party, had lost their appeal. The bank had become an impossibility under Tyler. Thousands of Indiana Whigs were interested in their own State Bank, whose prosperity would be endangered by a new United States Bank. The internal improvement issue had turned to ashes in the mouths of the Whigs; and the American tariff had come to be regarded with suspicion by the farm- ing class.
The period from 1841 to 1844 in Indiana was one of political realignment. Not only was there a change in the political management of the parties, but the old issues were discarded. The secret of the sweeping success of the Demo- crats in Indiana in the election of 1844 is due to the fact that that party first freed itself from the dead issues of the past, and placed itself in harmony with the advanced thought of the times. The Whigs tried to win the campaign on the same old issues, with the same old machinery, and with the same candidates which they had employed since, 1824. They seemed incapable of profiting either by the thought or the experience of the previous fifteen years.
Since the beginning of the rivalry between the Whig and the Jacksonian Parties, there had been two opposing commercial institutions in the State. The banks and the
469
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
land offices controlled the money of the State. The Demo- crats had always had control of the land offices, and the Whigs had always controlled the banks. The General As- sembly of 1841 appointed Nathan B. Palmer to make a thorough investigation of the condition of the bank.18 In 1843 the General Assembly, still on the trail of the bank, took the management of it out of Whig hands and gave it to Judge James Morrison, a Democrat. As an offset to this advantage the Democrats lost control of the land offices from 1841 to 1845. It is to be observed, however, that both the bank and the land offices were rapidly losing their political influence.
The opening battle of the new era in Indiana politics was the election of the United States senator to succeed O. H. Smith, whose term expired in 1843. The two parties were almost evenly matched in the General Assembly, so evenly that one or two votes would determine the contest. On the first ballot, O. H. Smith, the Whig candidate, re- ceived 72 votes ; Tilghman A. Howard, the Democratic can- didate, 74; Edward Hannegan, an independent Democratic candidate, 3; Joseph G. Marshall, a Whig, 1. On the second ballot Smith received 75 votes, Howard 74. Daniel Kelso, a Whig senator from Switzerland county, voted for Hanne- gan. On the sixth ballot the Democrats dropped Howard and supported Hannegan, who then received 76 votes and was elected.19 Kelso was openly charged with selling his vote.20 The Whigs by public resolution denounced him. It was the last opportunity of the Whig Party to elect a United States senator in Indiana. The bitterness was not confined to the Whigs, however. Howard and his friends never forgave some of the Democratic leaders for their part
18 Laws of Indiana; 1841, ch. 170.
19 Senate Journal, 1842, 349-355.
20 Indianapolis Journal, Jan. 25 and Feb. 1, 1843. These numbers contain articles on this remarkable election, for which all members later apologized. The 73 Democratic members made a statement in the Sen- tinel Feb. 7, 1843, over their own signatures, that Governor Whitcomb did not help defeat Howard. David Hoover, of Wayne county, classed himself as a Democrat, but Kelso, of Switzerland, did not. Cf. Sentinel, Jan. 31 and Feb. 7.
(31)
470
HISTORY OF INDIANA
in the contest, though it is difficult to see how they could have elected him.
The Democrats swept the State in the election of 1843. James Whitcomb succeeded Samuel Bigger in the governor's office. He was the first governor elected by the Democrats in Indiana. Eight out of the ten congressmen were elected on the Democratic ticket. In 1841 the Whigs had elected six out of the seven congressmen. This reversal was said to be due partly to a Democratic gerrymander by the Gen- eral Assembly of 1842.21 In the State legislature the sen- ate in 1843 stood 26 to 24, the house 55 to 45 in favor of the Democrats. The Whig junto at Indianapolis was driven from power after a continuous administration of eighteen years. The Methodist and Presbyterian churches deserted the Whigs, especially after it became apparent that Clay was to be the candidate in 1844.22
As soon as Harrison was dead, Clay and his followers began squaring away for the race in 1844. A barbecue in Clay's honor was prepared at Indianapolis, October 5, 1842. Delegations from all parts of the State visited the capital to hear their leader, and to take counsel together concerning the approaching contest.23 It was determined to conduct the campaign along the old lines. Van Buren was the only Democratic candidate above the horizon at that time. Had he been the candidate in 1844, the plan of the Whigs might have been carried to success, but as it turned out their course was fatal.
Such men as Robert Dale Owen, Joseph A. Wright, An- drew Kennedy, James Whitcomb and John W. Davis, preaching the new Democracy, were more than a match for the old Whigs. They pleaded for human rights, individual liberty, private initiative, that it was more the duty of the State to care for the unfortunate, the feeble, educate the children, and foster individual development, than to con-
21 Laws of Indiana, 1842, p. 38; Daily Sentinel, Feb. 10, 1843.
22 Western Sun, Sept. 2, 1843.
23 Indianapolis Journal, Sept. 23, 1842.
471
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
cern itself entirely with aiding bankers, manufacturers and transportation companies.24
Even the hitherto impregnable fortress of a high pro- tective tariff was assaulted by the enthusiastic young Democrats. James Whitcomb, then a candidate for gov- ernor on the Democratic ticket, formerly a supporter of Clay, showed by the logic of statistics that workmen in the factories were receiving $500 per year, while farm hands received only $213. There were ten farm hands in Indi- ana to one factory hand. The farm products were not pro- tected, but when the farm products were made into manu- factured goods, they were highly protected. The wheat and corn which the farmer sold were free, but the plow which he bought was protected. The best markets for the Indiana farmers were among the planters of the South. These same planters were being ruined by the high tariff. It was the first time the protection policy had been chal- lenged in Indiana, and it created considerable alarm in the Whig camp.25
The Whigs met in State convention at Indianapolis, January 16, 1844, for the purpose of inaugurating the cam- paign. There was no apparent lack of enthusiasm. An exceptionally strong electoral ticket, headed by Henry S. Lane and Joseph G. Marshall, was nominated. A central committee of twenty-six members was chosen. A novelty was instituted in the form of a board of sixty advocates, whose business it was to stump the State. This was the beginning of what later came to be known as the speaker's
24 The following sentiment by Senator William Allen, of Ohio, made the rounds of the Democratic press in Indiana in 1843-4. It is a fair sample of the eloquence of the young Democratic speakers of 1844: "Democracy is a sentiment not to be appalled, corrupted nor compro- mised. It knows no baseness, cowers at no danger, oppresses no weak- ness. Fearless, generous, humane, it rebukes the arrogant, cherishes honor, and sympathises with the humble. It asks nothing it will not concede. It concedes nothing it does not demand. Destructive only to despotism, it is the only preserver of liberty, labor and prosperity. It is the sentiment of freedom, equal rights, and equal obligations." West- ern Sun, July 1, 1843.
25 State Journal, April 11, May 12, May 19, May 23, May 28, 1843.
472
HISTORY OF INDIANA
bureau.26 The convention also appointed sixty delegates, five from each of the twelve judicial districts, to the Na- tional Convention.27 The Whigs met in the hall of the House of Representatives. In their enthusiasm, while cheering the speakers, many of the members stood on the tops of the desks, leaving the imprint of their hob-nailed shoes on the furniture. The Indianapolis Sentinel on this account referred to the convention as a "hob-nailed" mob. The Whigs accepted the title of "Hob-nails" without demur.28
Whig campaign papers were established in almost every county, backed financially by the Whig County Clubs. The Central Committee planned nineteen mass meetings in the different parts of the State, each to be the occasion of a barbecue and at least three addresses.29 Innumerable speak- ings, pole raisings, and rallies served to increase the gen- eral interest and excitement.
In the matter of substantial argument the Whigs were weak. By agreement Clay and Van Buren had eliminated the Texas question. Tyler had tried in vain to build a party around that issue. When Tyler failed his followers, to the great dismay of Clay, rallied around Polk and beat Van Buren in the convention. The Whigs of Indiana de- nounced the scheme to annex Texas as a venture uncalled for by the people; entirely southern in its origin and sup- port; unconstitutional; an unwarranted aggression upon a weak neighbor; assumption of a vast debt for the direct
26 Logansport Telegraph, Feb. 10, 1844; Indianapolis Whig Rifle, Mar. 14, 1844; Indianapolis Journal, May 25, 1844. 27 Indianapolis Journal, Mar. 23, 1844.
28 Indianapolis Journal, April 13, 1844.
29 Indianapolis Journal, Aug. 24, 1844. The times and dates were as follows : Evansville, Sept. 14; Princeton, Sept. 18; Washington, Sept. 21; Corydon, Sept. 25; Charlestown, Sept. 28; Bedford, Oct. 19; Madison, Oct. 2; Napoleon, Oct. 5; Cambridge City, Oct. 12; Shelby- ville, Oct. 9; Indianapolis, Oct. 22; Andersontown, Oct. 15; Rockville, Oct. 2; Lafayette, Oct. 5; Logansport, Oct. 8; Goshen, Oct. 16; Fort Wayne, Oct. 12; Laporte, Oct. 19; Terre Haute, Oct. 28. Henry S. Lane, R. W. Thompson, Hugh O'Neal, H. P. Biddle, Samuel C. Sample, John D. Defrees, Samuel Bigger, David Wallace, Albert F. White, O. H. Smith, Samuel Parker, Joseph G. Marshall and George G. Dunn were the principal speakers.
473
POLITICS FROM 1840 TO 1852
benefit of a few Americans who held Texan bonds ; in brief, as a policy that had no other purpose or justification than the spread of slavery.30
Besides the tariff and bank, the Whigs hoped to secure wide support among Jackson Democrats on their proposi- tion to distribute the proceeds of the public lands. This had once been looked on with favor by Jackson and Ben- ton.31 In the present condition of the State treasury it was thought that it would appeal with great strength to Indiana voters. The Democrats opposed the whole policy by which the national government would either assume any part of the State debts or distribute the proceeds of the public land sales. James Whitcomb said: "The effects which would result from the distribution would be deleteri- ous to the best interests of the laboring classes. It is nothing better than a direct scheme of bribery."32
A variation of the distribution policy was known as "the William Cost Johnson plan" from the name of its au- thor. By it the United States would issue national stock (currency) to the amount of $200,000,000, which would be distributed to the Western States in proportion to the public lands in each and would be received by the United States in payment for the lands. Under this plan Indiana would receive $8,519,823, which, it was urged, would go a long way on the State debt of $12,751,000.33
The Democrats of Indiana were not backward about beginning the campaign in Indiana. As early as July 4, 1843, Senator Lewis Cass visited the State, presumably to deliver the oration at Fort Wayne on completion of the
30 Indianapolis Journal, June 29, 1844. "We say this is a question that rises above all party. It means union or disunion; the free North will never submit to it; the free West will not submit to such a tax merely to spread slavery. Our free laborers are in favor of a tariff. The admission of Texas is a step toward the abandonment of our tariff system."-Editorial.
31 Jackson's message, 1829, quoted in the Journal April 6, 1844.
32 Indianapolis Journal, May 4, 1844.
33 Indianapolis Journal, April 6, 1844; also April 13, 1844.
474
HISTORY OF INDIANA
Wabash and Erie canal, but really to arouse the Democrats for the approaching struggle.34
The Democratic State convention met at Indianapolis on the anniversary of the victory of New Orleans, Jan- uary 8, for the purpose of organization. An electoral ticket was nominated.35 The general conduct of the cam- paign was similar to that of the Whigs. There were, how- ever, no joint debates. As indicated above, the party speak- ers did not usually discuss the same issues.
On the tariff, internal improvement, and bank ques- tions, Polk had acted quite as often with the Whigs as with the Democrats. Governor Whitcomb, who discussed the tariff oftener than any other Democrat, did not oppose the policy so much as he opposed giving its benefit to the manu- facturing interests alone. Senator Hannegan, by far the most eloquent speaker in the State at the time, aroused enthusiasm among the young voters by his presentation of the Texas and Oregon questions. Each party had, with- out success, made an effort in Congress to get appropria- tions for the National Road and the Wabash and Erie Canal.36
The Free Soil vote worried both parties. The followers of Clay made every possible concession without avail. A Free Soil paper, the Indiana Freeman, was established at the capital and a spirited campaign waged. In the last issue of the Indiana State Journal before the election, the Whig chairman, O. H. Smith, published a two-column ap-
34 His entire speech is given in the Indianapolis Sentinel, July 25, 1843.
35 Logansport Telegraph, Jan. 20, 1844. This ticket was as follows: Tilghman A. Howard, James G. Reed, Dr. Wm. A. Bowles, Dr. Elijah Newman, J. M. Johnson, Samuel E. Perkins, W. W. Wick, Paris C. Dun- ning, Henry W. Ellsworth, Charles W. Cathcart and Lucian P. Ferry. To these should be added Governor Whitcomb, Lieutenant Governor Jesse Bright, Senator Hannegan, J. W. Davis, T. J. Henly, R. D. Owen and a few others, to make up the list of Democratic orators.
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.