A history of St. Joseph County, Indiana, Volume 1, Part 21

Author: Howard, Timothy Edward, 1837-1916
Publication date: 1907
Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing company
Number of Pages: 826

USA > Indiana > St Joseph County > A history of St. Joseph County, Indiana, Volume 1 > Part 21

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).

It would seem that the boundaries as fixed by the enabling act of congress, and as agreed to by the constitutional convention of the state, were so definite that no dispute could arise concerning them ; yet each of the bound-

aries, except that between Indiana and Illinois has been the subject of contention. The west- ern boundary is exactly that fixed in the ordi- nance of 1787; and also that fixed by the act of congress, approved February 3, 1809. sett- ing off the territory of Illinois from that of Indiana; except that the ordinance of 1787 fixes simply the "Wabash river," from its month to Vincennes, as part of the boundary ; and the act setting off Illinois territory de- fines that territory to be "all that part of the Indiana territory which lies west of the Wabash river," and the direct line north from Vincennes. The wording of the ordinance of 1787, "the Wabash river," would doubtless be interpreted to mean the middle line of that river ; and the line is so defined in the enabling act providing for the admission of Indiana as a state. In the act setting off the territory of Illinois, however, it might be contended that as Illinois "lies west of the Wabash river." the boundary must be the west margin of that river. No such contention has ever been made by the state of Indiana. Yet such a conclusion has been reached as to the southern boundary of the state. The enabling act provided. as we have seen. that the state should be bounded on the south "by the river Ohio;" and this would seem to mean the mid- dle line of the river. The ordinance of 1787 also provided that "the middle state." that is, Indiana, should be bounded on the south "by the Ohio." The plain interpretation here also would seem to be that the middle line, or thread of the stream, should form the southern boundary of the state. But the words have not been so interpreted. In the act of cession by the legislature of Virginia, passed December 20. 1783, and in the deed of cession, made March 1, 1784, the territory ceded to the United States is described as "being to the northwest of the river Ohio." The territory on both sides of the Ohio. and the river itself, were at the time a part of Virginia; and the contention was early made by Kentucky, as succeeding to the rights of Virginia. that no part of the river was in-

106

HISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

cluded in the northwest territory, and conse- quently that no part of it could pass by the deed of cession. The ordinance of 1787 itself was "for the government of the territory of the United States northwest of the river Ohio." The claim of Kentucky has been sus- tained by the courts; and the southern bound- ary of Indiana is the low water mark on the northwest bank of the Ohio river, as the same existed when the boundary was fixed. As the river has since receded to the sonth in some places, we have the anomaly that parts of the state of Kentucky are at present located on the Indiana side of the river.

The rights of Indiana, however, as to the use and navigation of the Ohio, and also as to civil and criminal jurisdiction on the river, have been made secure. By section seven of an act concerning the erection of the district of Kentucky into an independent state, passed by the commonwealth of Virginia, De- eember 18, 1789. it was provided. "that the use and navigation of the river Ohio, so far as the territory of the proposed state of [Kentucky ], or the territory which shall re- main within the limits of this commonwealth lies therein, shall be free and common to the citizens of the United States: and the respec- tive jurisdictions of this commonwealth, and of the proposed state, on the river as afore- said, shall be concurrent only with the states which may possess the opposite shores of the said river."" The framers of the constitu- tion of 1816 seemed satisfied simply to declare the boundaries of the state: but the framers of the constitution of 1851, while repeating this declaration, took pains to add, in accord- ance with the aet of the commonwealth of Virginia, that "the state of Indiana shall possess jurisdiction and sovereignty co-exten- sive with the boundaries declared in the pre- ceding section; and shall have concurrent jurisdiction, in civil and criminal cases, with the state of Kentucky, on the Ohio river, and with the state of Illinois, on the Wabash river, . so far as said rivers form the common bound-

a. Vol. 1, Revised Laws of Virginia, p. 59.

ary between this state and said states respec- tively."&

The enabling act defines the eastern bonn- dary of Indiana to be "the meridian line which forms the western boundary of the state of Ohio." The ordinance of 1787 pro- vided that "the eastern state," that is, Ohio, should be bounded on the west by "a direct line drawn due north from the mouth of the Great Miami" to the British possessions. In the enabling act of congress for the admis- sion of Ohio, approved April 30, 1802. the same western boundary was fixed for that state. But in the act approved May 7, 1800, separating Indiana from the northwestern territory, the eastern boundary of Indiana, as we have already seen, was declared to be "the line beginning at the Ohio, opposite to the mouth of Kentucky river, and run- ning thence to Fort Recovery, and thence north, until it shall intersect the territorial line between the United States and Canada." Yet, in the same aet, it was also provided, "That whenever that part of the territory of the United States which lies to the eastward of a line beginning at the month of the Great Miami river, running thence due north to the territorial line between the United States and Canada, shall be erected into an inde- pendent state, and admitted into the Union on . an egnal footing with the original states, thenceforth said line shall become and re- main permanently the boundary line between snch state and the Indiana territory: any- thing in this aet contained to the contrary notwithstanding." As Ohio was admitted with the Great Miami meridian as her west- ern boundary, it would seem that she could have no claim to this irregular line by way of Fort Recovery; and, indeed, such imagi- mary claim, as a practical question, has long since been relinquished. Indiana has never stood out for the three mile strip west of Fort Recovery, now a part of the state of

a. See Sec. 17, Art. XI, constitution of 1816; Secs. 1 and 2, Art. XIV, constitution of 1851; Welsh v. State, 126 Ind. 71; 5 Wheaton (U. S.) 374; and 163 U. S. 520.

107

HISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

Ohio; and Ohio has abandoned any fancied claim to the wedge-shaped territory south of Fort Recovery, now a part of the state of Indiana. The old Indian boundary line, de- scribed in the treaty of Greenville, and ex- tending southwesterly from Fort Recovery to a point on the Ohio opposite the month of the Kentucky river, is, however, yet found on many Indiana maps, as a historie reminder of the contention once entertained between the two states.

But it was as to the northern boundary of the state that there was chief contention. The ordinance of 1787, after providing for the boundaries of the minimum number of three states into which the northwest ter- ritory should be divided, provided further that, if deemed expedient, congress should have anthority "to form one or two states in that part of said territory which lies north of an east and west line drawn through the sontherly bend or extreme of Lake Michi- gan." The enabling act. however, provided that the northern boundary of Indiana should be "an east and west line drawn through a point ten miles north of the south- ern extreme of Lake Michigan." The state of Indiana, therefore, extends ten miles north of the line provided in the ordinance of 1787 as the boundary between Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, on the south, and Michigan and Wis- consin on the north. This east and west line through the southern bend of Lake Michigan is sometimes called the ordinance boundary line and sometimes the old Michigan or In- diana boundary line. In St. Joseph county this old ordinance line runs through the town- ships of Penn, Center. Greene, Warren and Olive: leaving Osceola. Mishawaka, Sonth Bend. New Carlisle, and the larger part of the county in what would have been the state of Michigan, according to the ordinance of 1787. The ordinance boundary line is often referred to in the old records. As late as the May term, 1835, of the board of county commissioners of St. Joseph county, viewers were appointed "to view and lay out a road

leading from the Michigan road east as near as practicable on the old Indiana boundary line. between sections thirty-five, township thirty-seven, range two east, and section two, township thirty-six east, to the county line of Elkhart." On the first day of the Sep- tember term, being September 7, 1835, the viewers reported that they had laid ont the road, "Begining at the Michigan road, at the intersection of the Indiana old boundary line; running thence east on and as near on the said old boundary line as practicable, to the county line of Elkhart county." This report was approved and the road located and ordered opened to the width of forty feet.

The people of Michigan contended ear- nestly for the ordinance boundary line, claim- ing that any other boundary would be ille- gal and unconstitutional, for the reason that the provisions of the ordinance of 1787 in this regard were irrevocable, as defining the boundaries of the five states to be created out of the northwest territory. It appears that when the ordinace of 1787 was passed the true latitude of the southern extremes of Lake Michigan and Lake Erie was not known. At any rate, the people of Ohio at that time seem to have been of the opinion that an east and west line through the southern bend of Lake Michigan would strike Lake Erie north of Manmee bay. As if to force such an interpretation of the ordinance, a line was actually surveyed from the sontherly bend of Lake Michigan to the northerly eape of Manmee bay. The order for this survey was made by act of congress; and the in- tention of congress was to mark the old ordinance boundary. The survey was, how- ever, made under direction of the Ohio sur- veyor general, and he had the survey made according to the views of the Ohio author- ities. This line is called the Ohio line, and also the "Harris line," from the name of the surveyor. In the final settlement of the dis- pute, Ohio succeeded in making, or retain- ing, the Harris line as the northern boundary

108

HISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

of that state. Michigan was reluctantly per- suaded to receive in exchange for the terri- tory taken from her the upper peninsula of that state; and a most valuable exchange it has turned out to be. The Harris line was never accepted as the northern boundary of Indiana; neither did this state accept the ordinanee boundary, but took an indepen- dent, or perhaps, we might say, an arbitrary, position, insisting upon a ten mile strip north of the ordinance line, and giving as a rea- son for such insistence that otherwise she would be cut off from the navigation of Lake Michigan and the other great lakes. The Harris, or Ohio, line would not satisfy In- diana any better than the ordinance line; for both would prevent her from having a harbor on the great lakes. Michigan did not at first make a very strong contention against Indiana's claim.ª There were then no settlements in northern Indiana or south- western Michigan: whereas the territory in dispute between Ohio and Michigan included the town of Toledo and a rapidly growing district in the vieinity. The northern boun- dary of Indiana is an east and west line, but the northern boundary of Ohio, the Harris line, runs a little north of east. beginning on the east line of Indiana, at a point about four miles and a half south of the northern boundary of Indiana and running east by north to include the city of Toledo and Maumee bay. Neither did the ordinance line mark the boundary between Illinois and Wisconsin. Had it done so, Chicago would have been in Wisconsin, as it was at one time supposed to be. The northern boundary provided for in the ordinance of 1787, "an east and west line drawn through the south- erly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan," has therefore been wholly obliterated. For a very full and interesting treatment of the subject of our northern boundary line, see

a. For a controversy that arose later in Michi- gan, see Northwestern Pioneer, published at South Bend, May 2 and June 6, 1832.

chapter sixth of Daniel's History of Laporte County, Indiana.ª

Sec. 5 .- THE NAME OF THE STATE .- The name of our state, "Indiana," does not ap- pear in our history until the passage of the act of congress, approved May 7, 1800, pro- viding that all the northwest territory, west of a line through Fort Recovery, should "constitute a separate territory, and be called Indiana Territory." The name thus given is very dear to the people of this state, not only from the beauty of the word itself, but even more from its association with our history, as a territory and as a state, now for over a hundred years. Indiana terri- tory included at first not only the territory now forming our state, but also a part of that of Ohio and Michigan, all of Illinois and Wisconsin, and even part of Minnesota. As the successive territories were set off, how- ever, and the territories themselves were erected into states, the beloved name re- mained with us. Other names were found for our sister commonwealths: Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota; all in- deed beautiful, with their melodious French and Indian suggestions, but none of them comparable to our own Indiana.

There has been comparatively little dis- cussion as to the origin of the name. It would seem indeed that the origin should be evident. When the territorial government was set up in the year 1800, the country was almost wholly occupied by the Indians. So far as occupancy was concerned, it was the Indian land. In ancient and modern times, in Europe as well as America, the suffix a. when added to a word, has been understood to mean land, country or place. Greece was known as Grecia: Italy, as Italia; Germany, as Germania. So we have Russia, Prussia, Austria, Australia. Pennsylvania, Virginia, Louisiana and many others. Indiana means nothing therefore but Indian land or In- dian country.

a. Daniels' Hist. La Porte County, Indiana, pp. 44-62. The Lewis Publishing Company, Chi- cago.

109

ILISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

It appears, however, that our state was not the first to bear the pleasant sounding name. In an interesting paper read before the Wayne County Historical Society, Mr. Cyrus W. Hodgin tells the story of an older In- diana.ª

At the close of the French and Indian war, in 1763, says Mr. Hodgin, a Philadelphia trading company was formed to engage in the fur trade on the Ohio. The company sent its agents into the Ohio valley with large quantities of goods to exchange for furs and other products which the Indians were accus- tomed to bring to the trading posts. In the fall of that year, certain bands of Indians who were tributary to the Iroquois confed- eracy, attacked the agents of the Philadelphia company at a point a little below the site of the present city of Wheeling, and seized upon the goods of the company, which they appropriated to their own use. In compen- sation for this loss, the Iroquois transferred to the company a tract of nearly five thou- sand square miles of land lying south of the Ohio and east of the Great Kanawha,-a tract equal in extent to the state of Con- necticut. To this princely domain the com- pany gave the name of Indiana,-Indian land. In 1776 the traet was conveyed to a new company, known as the Indiana Land Company. Virginia, however, refused to ac- knowledge the Indian title held by the com- pany. A resort to the courts was equally unavailing. The eleventh amendment to the constitution of the United States, denying to citizens of one state the right to bring any ac- tion or suit against another sovereign state of the Union, was declared adopted, by proc- lamation of the president, issued January S, 1798; and so the long contested case was stricken from the docket of the supreme court of the United States. The Indiana Land Company having lost its claim, the company itself passed out of existence; and the name "Indiana" was but a memory, until, in 1800,

a. The Naming of Indiana, by Cyrus W. Hod- gin, Richmond, Ind., 1903.

it was bestowed upon this commonwealth, now the great central state of the Union. It is not at all probable that the naming of our state had any connection with the name of the eastern Indiana. Accidentally the name is the same; but in cach case, undoubtedly, the name given had direct reference to the Indians who occupied the country.

Sec. 6 .- THE TITLE OF HOOSIER .- But we have another name, a loving. pet name. the "Hoosier State." While comparatively little has been said or written as to the origin of the name "Indiana," very much has been said and written as to the origin of this good- natured name, "Hoosier."

In the paper already referred to, "The Naming of Indiana," Mr. Hodgin has brought together various anecdotes and sug- gestions that have been advanced in explana- tion of the origin of the name. Since about the year 1830, he says, Indiana has been fa- miliarly known as the Hoosier State, and the inhabitants have been called Hoosiers. A number of explanations of the origin of the term have been given. Meredith Nicholson, in his admirable little volume, "The Hoo- siers," has collected these explanations. They are as follows :

1. An Irishman employed in excavating the eanal around the falls at Louisville de- clared, after a fight in which he had van- quished several fellow workmen, that he was a "husher." This was given by Berry R. Sulgrove as a possible origin of the word.

2. Bartlett, in his "Dictionary of Ameri- canisms," says that the men of superior strength, the heroes of log-rollings and house- raisings, were called "hushers" because of their ability to hush or quiet their antag- onists; and that "husher" was a common term for a bully. The Ohio river boatmen carried the word to New Orleans, where a foreigner among them, in attempting to ap- ply the word to himself, pronounced it "hoosier."

3. A Louisville baker, named Hoosier, made a variety of sweet bread which was

110

HISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

so much enjoyed by Indiana people that they were called "Hoosier's customers," "Hoo- sier's men," "Hoosier's people," etc. The Rev. T. A. Goodwin says he first heard the word at Cincinnati, in 1830, where it was used to describe a species of gingerbread, but without reference to Indiana.

4. The Rev. Aaron Wood, a pioneer Meth- odist minister, says the word is a corruption of Hussar; the corruption originating as follows: When the young men of the In- diana side of the Ohio crossed over to Lonis- ville, the Kentuckians made sport of them, calling them "New Purchase greenies," and boasted of their own superiority. Fighting grew out of these boasts. and an Indianian who had a great admiration for the prowess of the soldiers called Hussars, after whip- ping one of the Kentuckians, bent over him and eried. "I'm a Hoosier," meaning "I'm a Hussar."

5. But. concludes Mr. Hodgin, the most probable explanation is that the word is a corruption of "Who's here ?" In my child- hood, in the backwoods of Randolph county, I often heard the response, "Who's here ?" to the rap at the door late at night, after the latch string had been drawn in. The word "here." however. was pronounced as if, in speaking the word "her," the sound of y were inserted between the h and e, mak- ing it "hver." "Who's hyer," or "Who's ver," as it was generally abridged, was a common response to the rap of the visitor late at night : and "Who's ver" easily took the form of "Hoosier."

Some of the foregoing explanations seem faneiful. From the meaning which has al- ways been attached to the name Hoosier, we are inelined to the opinion that it may more likely be derived from "husher," meaning a strong, resolute fellow who could "hush" a boasting antagonist in short order: or, per- haps, from "Hussar." a daring soldier. It may be that both words contributed to give form and meaning to the term. But see "Hoozer" in Mr. Dunn's paper, following:

we are inclined to agree with Mr. Dunn's conclusions.

In the number of the Northwestern Pio- neer and St. Joseph's Intelligencer. pub- lished at South Bend, under date of April 4, 1832, we find a humorous paragraph show- ing that the word hoosier was used at that early date to refer to great size and strength. and, as such, was applied to the big sturgeons of Lake Michigan, then our regular spring- time visitors. The paragraph reads :

"A REAL HOOSIER .- A sturgeon, who no doubt left Lake Michigan on a trip of pleas- ure, and with a view of spending a few days in the pure waters of the St. Joseph. had his joyous anticipations unexpectedly marred by running foul of a fisherman's spear. near this place. Being brought on terra firma and cast into a balance, he was found to weigh eighty-three pounds." It will be noticed that the word hoosier, in this paragraph, has no reference to an Indianian, as such; "a real hoosier," as here used, simply means a strong, husky fellow.

As applied to the human being, the word seems to have originally conveyed the ideas of vigorous manhood, hearty good feeling. shrewdness and good common sense. A Hoosier was a man to be depended upon, but not to be trifled with. He was one who could do things and was not afraid or ashamed to do them, in manly fashion. The word has grown somewhat refined in meaning with the advancement of the state; but it still signifies a person of manly bearing, shrewd- ness, ability and kindliness. Such are the men who have made Indiana great. It is a noble word, as now used: and every genuine Indianian is proud to be known as a Hoosier.

The suggestion has also been made that the good word may have come to us from the French "huissier," meaning "usher"; that is, one appointed to seat people attending a publie meeting and to aid in maintaining or- der. On such occasions the ushers are some- times disposed to display unnecessary anthor- ity, and so themselves cause more disturb-

111

HISTORY OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY.

ance than the very audience they are sup- posed to watch over. In a little French clas- sic published in the early part of the seven- teenth century, such over-officious ushers are referred to, the author saying: The ushers (les huissiers) make more noise than those they are appointed to keep quiet." The word "huissier," judging by the spelling, might by one not acquainted with French, be pro- nonneed almost the same as "hoosier," and we can fancy in a backwoods meeting at an early day hearing the good natured ushers reproved by some one who remembered the passage in the little French book, and who knew how to read French better than he did how to pronounce the words.

The following paper recently prepared by Mr. Jacob Piatt Dunn, secretary of the In- diana Historical Society, and published in the transactions of that society, is the most complete review of this interesting topic. We give the paper substantially as written by Mr. Dunn.

The discussion is admirable and most sat- isfactory, and we believe the distinguished author has actually found the original of our Hoosier in the Cumberland "hoozer":

During the period of about three-quarters of a century in which the state of Indiana and its people have been designated by the word "Hoosier." there has been a large amount of discussion of the origin and mean- ing of the term, but with a notable lack of any satisfactory result. Some of these dis- enssions have been almost wholly conjectural in character, but others have been more meth- odical, and of the latter the latest and most exhaustive-that of Mr. Meredith Nicholson? -- sums up the results in the statement "The origin of the term 'Hoosier' is not known with certainty." Indeed the statement might properly have been made much broader, for a consideration of the various theories offered leaves the unprejudiced investigator with the feeling that the real solution of the problem has not even been suggested. This lack of satisfactory conclusions, however, may be of

a. "Les huissiers font plus de bruit que ceux qu' ils veulent faire taire." Philothea, St. Fran- cis de Sales, Part III., Chapter VIII.

b. "The Hoosiers," pp. 20-30.

some value, for it strongly suggests the prob- ability that the various theorists have made some false assumption of fact, and have thus been thrown on a false scent, at the very beginning of their investigations.

As is natural in such a case, there has been much of assertion of what was merely conjectural, often accompanied by the pion- eer's effort to make evidence of his theory by the statement that he was "in Indiana at the time and knows the facts." The ac- ceptance of all such testimony would neces- sarily lead to the adoption of several con- flicting conclusions. In addition to this cause of error, there have crept into the dis- cussion several misstatements of fact that have been commonly adopted, and it is evi- dent that in order to reach any reliable con- clusion now, it will be necessary to examine the facts critically and ascertain what are tenable.

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.

A history of St. Joseph County, Indiana, Volume 1, Part 21

Author: Howard, Timothy Edward, 1837-1916 Publication date: 1907 Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing company Number of Pages: 826

Author: Howard, Timothy Edward, 1837-1916
Publication date: 1907
Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing company
Number of Pages: 826