USA > Indiana > Vigo County > History of Indiana from its exploration to 1922, Vol II > Part 7
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
655
ELECTION OF 1860
by the latter. The General Assembly became Repub- lican by a small majority in each house.47
During the years between 1856 and 1860 political leaders were trying to get their respective parties ready for the battle of 1860 which all seemed to recognize would test the continued supremacy of the Democratic party, which had then controlled the state since 1843. Democratic leaders were apprehen- sive. They had seen their old-time majorities of 20,- 000 dwindle down to a mere technicality, the suspen- sive veto of the governor. Wright, Bright, English, Davis, Lane and Pettit had seen the former Demo- cratic conventions, harmonious and jubilant in vic- tory and the praise of their captains, gradually change into discordant groups of bickering, jealous, half-hearted slackers. The machine built up with such care and cost by Jacob Page Chapman, James Whitcomb, Joseph Wright, Edward Hannegan, Tilghman Howard, and Dr. Ellis was going headlong into the ditch with the imperious slave-master from Madison at the wheel. On the other hand, the young Republican colt, a cross with Whig, American, anti- slavery and temperance strains, was cavorting dan-
47 Editor Norman, of the New Albany Ledger, in an excellent editorial, Nov. 26, 1858, thus summed up the results: "Since the rise of the Republican party the northern Democracy have lost, one after another, nearly all their ancient strongholds. In the contest of 1856 only two northern States, Pennsylvania and Indi- ana, gave Buchanan clear majorities. Pennsylvania has since gone over, leaving Indiana alone. It is the position of Indiana as the most reliable northern Democratic State and not any particular merit of her prominent politicians that attaches more than ordinary interest to the movements of the Democratic leaders . within her limits. The same causes that have spread disaster into other States have not been unfelt here. The same division of sentiment which followed the inauguration of the Lecompton policy of the administration in other States also took place in Indiana. It was found impossible to repress these dissensions or prevent divisions."
656
HISTORY OF INDIANA
gerously, responsive to neither bit nor spur. Buce- phalus needed a rider.
An overwhelming majority of the Democrats of Indiana were followers of Douglas, county after county, in the closing days of 1859, at their mass con- ventions declaring for him.48 The Whigs were losing their American allies in the Republican party for opposite reasons. Persuading themselves that they held the balance of power, the Americans early in 1860 laid down the conditions on which they would co-operate with the Republicans.49 The Republicans complied so far with these demands as to summon a "Mass State Convention" for February 22, 1860. The name Republican was not used in the call, but the ticket was officially designated Republican.
The Americans deplored the Abolition tendencies of the radical Republicans. The latter recommended Helper's Impending Crisis to their friends while Henry S. Lane, speaking from the American stand- point, called it incendiary.50 The Democrats used this recommendation of Helper pretty effectively for awhile; but the final result was favorable to the Re- publicans. It was attempted to show, after the John Brown raid at Harper's Ferry, that this hare- brained conduct was the result of reading such litera- ture. The final sympathy, partly due to the fact that Captain Cook, the companion of Brown, was a
48 Charles Zimmerman, "Origin and Rise of the Republican Party in Indiana," in Indiana Magazine of History, XIII, 211, 349. 49 New Albany Tribune, Jan. 13, 1860. (1) "That an 'Oppo- sition' convention be called in which Republicans, Americans and Whigs shall participate, fully, freely, and fairly; (2) that no man entertaining ultra views upon the slavery question shall be nominated for any office; (3) that the platform adopted shall be national, and not sectional, conservative, and not radical; (4) that the delegates to the national convention shall be instructed to vote for Bates, Bell or Corwin for President."
50 Indianapolis Sentinel, Jan. 31 and Feb. 28, 1860.
657
ELECTION OF 1860
brother-in-law of Governor Willard, was with Brown as a martyr. It at least would have been good poli- tics to put Brown in a mad house.
On January 11, the Democrats held the first state convention of 1860. Thinking, perhaps, they might thereby more easily control it, the state executive committee had decided on a delegate instead of a mass convention. However, Robert Lowry, a Doug- las man, was elected chairman over Judge Samuel Perkins, a Bright man, by a vote of 1891/2 to 1741/2. Later Douglas delegates were seated from seven con- tested counties. The real struggle came on a resolu- tion to instruct the Indiana delegation to the national convention for Douglas, the vote favoring Douglas 265 to 129. For governor the convention nominated Thomas A. Hendricks, and for his running mate David Turpie.51 It is doubtful if two better candi- dates could have been found. It could be said of each that he prized his party more highly than any indi- vidual person. It was understood among the leaders that if the Democrats were successful Hendricks should go to the United States senate and Turpie be- come governor. The platform resolutions endorsed the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the Dred Scott decision and favored the acquisition of Cuba. How any voter could support both the Kansas-Nebraska bill and the Dred Scott decision was not explained.
With the Republicans the one question was, what would be the attitude on slavery? They were agreed that slavery should not be extended; but not as to whether congress of its own power should exclude slavery from the territories or whether it should be left to the voters of a territory to exclude it when the territory became a state. At first thought the dif- ference between the plans seemed negligible, but a
51 Indianapolis Journal, Jan. 12, 13, 1860.
658
HISTORY OF INDIANA
second thought disclosed grave possibilities. If they depended on congress alone then a Democratic ma- jority might lead to disaster, as had happened in the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. - If they trusted to popular sovereignty then the territory might be full of slaveholders when it applied for admission and, if it should declare for freedom, it would only be after a bloody struggle such as was then devastat- ing Kansas. It was finally decided to retain both methods so that if the supreme court declared a con- gressional act abolishing slavery in the territories unconstitutional a fighting chance would still re- main.52 The Americans preferred not to mention the slavery question at all, while the extreme anti-slav- ery wing would have condemned the whole institu- tion. These were the serious questions that con- fronted State Chairman M. C. Garber and the execu- tive committee, when they formulated the call for a convention. Some, and among them the state chair- man, preferred a strong, straight-forward platform, made without regard to any faction, but it was point- ed out that if the party was to live it must be suc- cessful, so prudence prevailed.58
52 Indianapolis Journal, March 2, 1860; New York Times, March 13, 1860.
53 Following is the call sent out by State Chairman Garber : "The people of Indiana who are opposed to the policy of the present administration of the general government, to federal cor- ruption and usurpation, to the extension of slavery into the territories, to the new and dangerous political doctrine that the constitution, of its own force, carries slavery into all the terri- tories of the United States, to the reopening of the African slave trade; and who are in favor of the immediate admission of Kansas into the Union under the constitution recently adopted by its people, of restoring the federal administration to a system of rigid economy and to the principles of Washington and Jeffer- son, of maintaining inviolate the rights of the States, and of defending the soil of every State from lawless invasion, and of preserving the integrity of the Union and the supremacy of the
659
ELECTION OF 1860
There seems to have been no factional strife in the convention. Morton had many admirers, who would gladly have backed him for the governorship, but all agreed that Henry S. Lane was the most avail- able candidate.
Lane was a rare specimen of the old type of Indi- ana citizenship. There is no evidence of his ever having had a personal enemy. He had been a soldier in the Mexican war and in 1860 was without a rival on the political hustings. Moreover it was mutually agreed, though not made public, that Morton should be his running mate and if successful, Lane should become United States senator and Morton should succeed to the governorship. The preliminaries be- ing thus arranged, the two men were nominated with- out opposition. After selecting candidates for the remaining offices the immense crowd, in session finally on the statehouse lawn, because no hall in the capital would hold half the delegates, returned home,
constitution and laws passed in pursuance thereof against the conspiracy of the leaders of the sectional party to resist the majority principle as established in the national government, even at the expense of its existence; who are opposed to the present profligate and reckless administration of the State government of Indiana and its disregard of the laws in its management of the pecuniary affairs of the State, and who are in favor of restoring the State government to a system of strict economy and subordination to the laws of the State; who are in favor of the passage of laws against the embezzlement of the people's money by the State officers, and who are in favor of an honest administration of State affairs, are requested to meet in their respective counties on any day to be agreed upon by them and elect delegates to attend the mass State convention, to be held at Indianapolis, on the 22nd of February, 1860, to appoint candi- dates for State offices and to appoint delegates to attend the national convention, to be held at Chicago on the 13th of June next, to nominate candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States. M. C. GARBER, Chairman." Chas. Zimmer- man, Indiana Magazine of History, XIII, 378.
660
HISTORY OF INDIANA
satisfied with their work and eager for the contest.
Two stronger tickets never opposed each other in an Indiana campaign. Lane, Turpie, Hendricks, Morton and Harrison, all candidates at this time, followed each other to the United States senate where they served a total of forty years. Harrison opposed Michael C. Kerr for reporter of the supreme court. The former became president and the latter speaker. Among the congressmen were Albert G. Porter, a future governor, Daniel W. Voorhees, who later spent eighteen years in the United States sen- ate after having spent eight in the house, and Schuy- ler Colfax, who was later a speaker and vice-presi- dent. These candidates not only earned an honest national reputation for themselves but brought fame to their state. Finally there were Lincoln and Douglas on the national tickets.
As soon as the state conventions were over the voters turned to the national conventions. There were misgivings among the Democrats as the Charleston convention dragged along from April 23 to May 3 without a choice. The situation became alarming when the party divided at Baltimore, where the northern wing nominated Douglas and the south- ern nominated Breckinridge. It was hoped by Indi- ana Democrats up to this time that a schism in the party might be avoided. This would at least give them a fair chance in Indiana. A mass meeting was held at Indianapolis, July 18, to ratify the nomina- tion of Douglas and Johnson.54 The Brickenridge supporters, however, did not attend. They were busily organizing and on July 31, held their ratifica- tion in Indianapolis. They seem to have made a sin- cere effort to reach an agreement with the Douglas
54 Indianapolis Sentinel, July 19, 1860.
661
ELECTION OF 1860
supporters, but the latter had no faith in the sincer- ity of the former.
Indiana sent an enthusiastic delegation to the Re- publican national convention at Chicago, May 16, which seemed unanimous in support of Lincoln. The same influence which caused Lane to be nominated for governor over Morton caused Lincoln to be pre- ferred by them over Seward. Lincoln and Lane were very much alike, typical of the best citizenship of pioneer Indiana. The Indianians took credit for the nomination of the former Hoosier and on August 29, at Indianapolis, turned out by thousands to ratify the nomination. There was a touch of the forties in their jubilant actions. "Wide Awakes," "Rail Maul- ers,""Abe's Boys" and others came marching with fife and drum, strange premonition of the approach- ing tragedy.
One more organization yet remains to be noted to complete the tale of conventions in this remarkable campaign. The Constitutional Unionists, those who wished to ignore the slavery question, as both parties had done in 1852, met at Indianapolis, August 15. There seem to have been about 150 delegates present, representing the southern part of the state more fully than the northern. It is substantially true to say that this party was made up of Americans.55 An electoral ticket favorable to John Bell and Edward Everett was nominated, after a brief statement of the political position of the party had been made.56 The Douglas Democrats made strenuous efforts to secure an alliance with this party, but it seems that most of them followed the lead of R. W. Thompson, their most distinguished member, and supported the Republican local tickets.
55 Carl Brand, "History of Know Nothings in Indiana," Mss., 168.
56 Indianapolis Journal, Aug. 16, 1860.
662
HISTORY OF INDIANA
There were thus four national tickets in the field in Indiana, each supported by an able body of men. The contest, however, was soon seen to be between the Douglas Democrats and the Republicans, the only parties which had state and county tickets. The labor of the campaign fell on Lane and Hendricks and Morton and Turpie who in pairs toured the state discussing the issues in joint debate. These four men stood in the dawn of a new day. Through the politi- cal degradation of that day they had come unsoiled. The political spoilsmen had been sent to the rear and Indiana had a right to look to the future more hope- fully than ever before. There was little bitterness and almost no personality in the campaign. After the state election in October the Democrats tried to influence the timid voter by representing that seces- sion would follow a Republican victory. Whether they, themselves, were sincere or not it had no ap- preciable effect on the voters. The threat itself was dishonest and unsportsmanlike.57
The results of the election were not surprising to any one. Lincoln received 139,033 votes; Douglas, 115,509; Breckenridge, 12,294; Bell, 5,306; Lane, 136,725; Morton, 136,470; Hendricks, 126,768; Tur- pie, 126,292.58
57 Charles Kettleborough, "Indiana on the Eve of the Civil War," 166, seq., has worked out this subject fully.
58 Indianapolis Journal, Dec. 4 and Dec. 14, 1860. The total votes for the state officers are taken from House Journal, 1861, p. 60.
ELECTION RETURNS OF 1860 BY COUNTIES
Hendricks ...
Lane.
Lincoln.
Douglas. . . . .
Breckenridge.& 2 42
Bell.
Adams
842
549
632
887
Allen
2,845
2,487
2,552
3,224
663
ELECTION OF 1860
Usually after an election in the United States there is a feeling of relief, during which the partisans
Hendricks ...
Lane ..
Lincoln.
Douglas .....
Breckenridge. 8
34
Benton
248
5,105
375
235
6
8
Boone
1,550
1,709
1,699
941
649
47
Blackford
472
273
275
408
40
9
Brown
744
296
301
729
31
6
Carroll
1,492
1,556
1,590
1,446
5
14
Cass
1,857
1,862
1,874
1,727
130
34
Clark
1,989
1,578
1,369
1,837
250
316
Clay
1,356
862
889
1,316
47
51
Clinton
1,437
1,385
1,454
1,437
61
6
Crawford
869
841
778
844
8
42
Daviess
1,501
1,019
934
749
529
133
Dearborn
2,548
2,077
2,127
2,436
61
96
Decatur
1,672
2;003
2,028
1,946
93
20
DeKalb
1,372
1,517
1,500
1,339
2
24
Delaware
1,051
1,755
1,933
1,029
98
10
Dubois
1,437
274
301
1,347
2
20
Elkhart
2,010
2,404
2,471
1,938
27
1
Fayette
1,010
1,303
1,343
917
39
9
Floyd
1,876
1,676
1,151
1,888
96
320
Fountain
1,607
1,655
1,656
1,360
269
6
Fulton
1,073
1,030
1,019
991
22
6
Franklin
2,289
1,679
1,695
2,272
49
9
Gibson
1,580
1,273
1,298
1,545
29
112
Grant
1,213
1,568
1,668
1,223
33
46
Greene
1,518
1,372
1,420
1,316
204
20
Hamilton
1,151
2,091
2,195
1,144
98
4
Harrison
1,876
1,691
1,593
1,848
36
17
Hancock
1,399
1,148
1,201
1,289
97
13
Hendricks
1,370
2,022
2,050
1,083
244
41
Henry
1,328
2,797
2,926
1,206
90
16
Howard
897
1,518
1,589
875
35
15
Huntington
1,388
1,508
1,582
1,402
52
14
Jackson
1,725
1,083
1,185
1,740
117
36
Jasper
278
525
534
278
7
17
...
Bartholomew
1,966
1,736
1,769
1,846
Bell ....
664
HISTORY OF INDIANA
shake hands, congratulate the victors and resume ordinary work. This no doubt would have been the
Hendricks ...
Lane.
Lincoln.
Douglas .....
Breckenridge."
6
Jefferson
1,800
2,624
2,661
1,146
564
150
Jennings
915
1,630
1,649
830
326
42
Johnson
1,706
1,263
1,303
1,392
336
60
Knox
1,742
1,580
1,570
1,666
42
39
Kosciusko
1,457
2,192
2,290
1,500
9
3
Lagrange
750
1,621
1,695
749
10
16
Lake
540
1,098
1,225
455
20
..
Laporte
2,013
3,000
3,167
1,508
474
27
Lawrence
1,143
1,272
1,158
787
525
208
Madison
1,847
1,669
1,709
1,841
70
36
Marion
3,821
4,864
5,024
3,252
319
161
Marshall
1,348
1,372
1,126
1,473
24
2
Martin
789
528
516
679
153
56
Miami
1,673
1,855
1,835
1,608
26
. .
Monroe
1,168
1,195
1,198
716
395
64
Montgomery
2,273
2,399
2,367
2,179
68
78
Morgan
1,621
1,721
1,755
1,516
62
14
Newton
248
277
305
189
44
1
Noble
1,377
1,678
1,742
1,320
38
4
Ohio
503
464
301
335
203
174
Orange
1,149
856
849
1,114
176
85
Owen
1,484
1,163
1,140
1.293
88
118
Parke
1,365
1,881
1,898
1,321
55
84
Perry
1,042
1,056
1,026
917
6
160
Pike
910
863
894
882
58
39
Porter
949
1,434
1,529
889
28
6
Posey
1,611
993
1,055
1,128
523
168
Pulaski
661
550
571
663
4
7
Putnam
1,904
1,953
1,888
1,747
361
123
Randolph
1,260
2,093
2,298
1,180
56
10
Ripley
1,610
1,960
1,988
1,458
174
37
Rush
1.668
1,742
1,757
1,119
476
35
Scott
699
662
660
447
262
52
Shelby
2,137
1,895
1,900
2,047
43
25
Bell.
·
Jay
1,089
1,107
1,135
1,077
665
PARTISANSHIP AND PATRIOTISM
case in Indiana in 1860 but for the ominous condition in the South.
§ 119 PARTISANSHIP AND PATRIOTISM
The Republicans were naturally elated over the sweeping success of their party. The assurance of the party, however, was hardly warranted by the size of the majority, that of Lincoln being only 5,996; he had run ahead of Lane 2,308.
On the 22d of November a mass meeting was held in Indianapolis in celebration of the victory. There the leaders laid their plans for the new administra- tion. By this time everyone knew that Morton was
Hendricks .. .
Lane ..
Lincoln.
Douglas. .
Breckenridge.
Bell.
Spencer
1,367
1,265
1,296
1,108
172
175
Stark
265
187
190
231
14
2
St. Joseph
1,534
2,253
2,363
1,489
23
5
Steuben
60€
1,390
1,560
547
82
8
Sullivan
1,875
847
856
1,858
128
55
Switzerland
1,019
1,081
734
476
499
510
Tippecanoe
2,373
3,328
3,480
2,276
117
34
Tipton
785
697
780
822
21
3
Union
711
844
819
652
36
3
Vanderburgh
1,919
1,893
1,875
1,544
183
302
Vermilion
849
1,060
1,090
844
17
24
Vigo
2,341
2,437
2,429
2,127
44
211
Wabash
1,141
2,080
2,287
1,142
79
20
Warren
747
1,349
1,412
769
33
15
Warrick
1,353
639
745
784
816
85
Washington
1,944
1,354
1,378
1,988
48
31
Wayne
2,027
4,059
4,234
1,784
161
102
Wells
1,023
847
909
1,099
6
3
White
890
980
993
811
67
9
Whitley
1,091
1,098
1,133
1,067
33
4
Totals
126.968
136,725
139,033
115,509
12,294
5,306
666
HISTORY OF INDIANA
to be governor and on him was placed the mantle of leadership, which he wore unchallenged until his death, seventeen years later.
The first Republican General Assembly met, Jan- uary 10, 1861. The Republicans controlled the house by a majority of 62 to 38 and the senate by 28 to 22. After the usual formalities of organization were over, the Assembly, on January 16, elected Governor Lane to the United States senate and Morton at once assumed the duties of governor. The situation which confronted the Assembly was full of trouble. Party discipline was lax and official honesty was worse. There was no law against embezzlement and the sys- tem of bookkeeping at the statehouse was such that it is impossible to be sure where mistakes were due to ignorance or dishonesty. The state debt was about $10,000,000, for which it had been necessary to bor- row $125,000, the past year, to pay interest. The various funds were overdrawn heavily, while down- right stealing was going on in connection with the building of the northern penitentiary and the sale of the swamp lands.59 From the various special funds such as the Common School, Sinking, and Swamp Land, the state had borrowed $989,188 for running expenses. The Assembly put in most of its time dis- cussing resolutions concerning federal affairs. Over 500 such resolutions were introduced in the two houses, many of which produced acrimonious debate. So much of the time of the Assembly was thus occu-
59 For a mild expression on this subject, see majority and minority reports, Ways and Means, House Journal, 1861, 1044, seq. The General Assembly of 1859 by Joint Resolution XXIV appointed Judges John T. Elliott, William T. Otto and Norman Eddy to ascertain and report amounts due the State from former officers. A study of their report, p. 225, Documentary Journal, 1861, Pt. I, will give one an idea of the criminality common among the officeholders of the time.
667
COERCION OR SECESSION
pied that a special session was necessary. This met, April 24, 1861, and in a few days passed the general and specific appropriation bills, bills defining embez- zlement and limiting official fees and salaries, nego- tiated a loan of $2,000,000 and, most important of all, reorganized the militia.60 Before the short session was ended the Civil war had begun, the last act print- ed in the volume of laws being one to organize six regiments of volunteers.
§ 120 COERCION OR SECESSION
By the beginning of 1861 the Republicans had be- come more thoughtful. They were connseled by their leaders to avoid all partisan conversation. Factories were closing, the stock markets were deserted and prices had declined fifty per cent.e1 In the various counties the people were assembling in what they termed Union meetings, resolving to stand by the Chicago platform, by Lincoln, by the Republican party, or in some few cases by the Crittenden resolu- tion.62 The Republicans as a rule were defiant to- ward the South. The Democratic meetings usually urged some form of mediation or conciliation. From Virginia came an invitation to join in a convention of the states looking toward conciliation. The Assem- bly by joint resolution instructed the governor to appoint a commission of five men to attend this convention.63
60 Laws of Indiana, Extra Session, 1861, chs. I, V, XXV, XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX, XXXV, and XXXVI.
61 Indianapolis Journal, Jan. 1, 1861.
62 Indianapolis Journal, Jan. 5, 1861. "We hold the secession of any State from the federal union to be treason against it and the penalties prescribed by law should be inflicted." Resolution of Morgan county.
63 House Journal, 277; Senate Journal, 221. As an example of the fervid rhetoric which occupied the time of the General Assembly and the numerous meetings, the following from Horace
668
HISTORY OF INDIANA
On February 13, Robert Dale Owen delivered to the Assembly a maundering tirade on "the reign of the demagogue," pleading for peace, concession and conciliation.6+ This speech was planned to influence the new President. Mr. Lincoln visited Indianapolis, February 11, speaking briefly from the balcony of the Bates House. Governor Morton sought to get a pub- lic statement of policy from him, but to no purpose. It is surprising how little they knew then of Lin- coln's power.65
Heffren will suffice. House Journal, 1861, p. 269: "Anti-slavery lecturers, orators and stump speakers have, it seems to us, done all in their power to aid and assist in the great drama; and even professed ministers of God, men who hypocritically pretend to be ambassadors of the Most High, have descended from their lofty position and prostituted their talents and the pulpit, soiled the robes of religion, disgraced decency and outraged morality, by their infamous and hellish harangues, to aid in the unholy and nnchristian cause of bringing about contention and strife. Their whole theme has been of the wrongs of another race, upon whose very forms the God of creation has stamped the impress of in- feriority to that of the white, and by their lectures, speeches and sermons, have pertinaciously continued the crusade until we now stand, as it were, upon the slumbering volcano, with its hot, bolling lava rolling and thundering beneath our feet, and wanting but a breath to overwhelm all in a common ruin. Such is the terrible condition of our country today, and to this has she been brought by the demagogues and fanatics, until a portion of the people of the Union seek to preserve their rights by secession." This commission consisted of Caleb B. Smith, of Indianapolis; P. A. Hacklman, of Rush county; G. S. Orth, of Tippecanoe; T. C. Slaughter, of Sullivan; E. W. H. Ellis, of Elkhart.
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.