History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916, Part 11

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1104

USA > Indiana > History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916 > Part 11

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).

Among these exceptionally able men was Richard Wigginton Thompson, the greater part of his life a resident of Terre Haute. He was popularly known as "Silver- tongued Dick Thompson," and in later years acquired distinction in the literary world. The "History of Protective Tariff Laws," issued in 1888, may be said to con- stitute his most important work in this line. He was born in Culpeper county, Va., June 9, 1809; pursued classical studies; moved to Louisville, Ky., in 1831; clerk in a store; moved to Lawrence county, Ind .; taught school; studied law, was admitted to the bar in 1834, and began practice in Bedford, Ind .; member of the State House of Representatives 1834-1836; served in State Senate 1836-1838 and served for a short time as president pro tempore; elected as a Whig to the Twenty-seventh Congress (March 4, 1841-March 3, 1843) ; unsuccessful candidate for re-election ; presidential elector in 1840 on the Harri- son and Tyler ticket; re-elected as a Whig to the Thirtieth Congress (March 4, 1847- March 3, 1849) ; declined a renomination; declined the office of Austrian minister, tendered him by President Taylor, the of- fice of Recorder of the General Land Office, tendered by President Fillmore, and a seat on the bench of the Court of Claims, ten- dered by President Lincoln; presidential elector on the Lincoln and Johnson ticket in 1864: delegate to the Republican national convention in Chicago in 1868 and in Cincinnati in 1876; Judge of the Fifth

( 78)

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

Indiana Circuit Court 1867-1869; Secre- he was admitted to the bar in 1830. By tary of the Navy under President Hayes from March 12, 1877, until his resignation, December 21. 1880; chairman of the American Committee of the Panama Canal Company; director of the Panama Rail- road Company. Died in Terre Haute, Ind., February 9, 1900.

Joseph L. White was born in Cherry Valley, N. Y., fitted himself for the law, and began practice in the historic town of Madison. Served one term in Con- gress, then moved to New York, and there resumed the practice of law. Later on he engaged in manufacturing. Died January 12, 1861.

James H. Cravens was by birth a Vir- ginian; moved to Madison in 1829 and engaged in agricultural pursuits. Later on he located in Ripley county, where he practiced law and managed a farm. Was an elector on the Harrison ticket in 1840 and served one term in Congress as a Whig. Though a Virginian by birth, he was a pronounced anti-slavery man. As such he was nominated for Governor by the Freesoilers in 1848, and, of course, defeated. His devotion to the Union im- pelled him, at the age of sixty, to enlist in the Eighty-third Regiment of Indiana Volunteers, of which he was made lieu- tenant-colonel. He died at Osgood, Ind., December 4, 1876, and was buried at Ver- sailles.

Andrew Kennedy was one of the noted men of the State. Born in Dayton, Ohio, July 24, 1810, he came with his parents to Indiana, locating on the Indian reservation near Lafayette. Soon after he went to reside with an aunt in Conners- ville, where he became an apprentice in a blacksmith shop. While in the act of shoeing a horse he was kicked so severely that continuation at that trade was deemed physically impracticable and in- advisable. Fairly well equipped with a common school education, he qualified himself for the law. Located at Muncie,

reason of his fine natural abilities and his thorough understanding of human nature he built up a remunerative practice. Pos- sessing the elements of personal popular- ity in an eminent degree, he was elected a member of the Legislature in 1835 and promoted to the Senate in 1838. As a candidate for Presidential elector in 1840 he made quite a reputation as a stump speaker. Before the expiration of his term as Senator he was elected to Con- gress and thereafter twice re-elected, serving from 1841 to 1847. A fourth nomination was tendered him, but de- clined. He evinced a desire to be made United States Senator, to succeed Edward A. Hannegan, and at the opening of the legislative session, in December, 1841, proceeded to Indianapolis to make a can- vass for that high office. He was stricken with smallpox, which dread disease pre- cipitated a rather unceremonious ad- journment of the General Assembly, though this was the only case in town. He died the last day of December of that year at the Palmer House, for many years Democratic headquarters. His body was taken at the dead of night, wrapped in the clothes of the bed in which he died, to the cemetery, attended only by the hack driver and sexton, and consigned to Moth- er Earth. The hackman and the sexton who performed the sad task of laying him away in his tomb contracted the fatal dis- ease which took him off and in less than two weeks thereafter were laid by his side. "A sad ending," as Woollen put it, "was this of a career which promised so much." Deep-felt sorrow was manifested throughout the State over this sad ending of an extraordinary career. While in Congress Mr. Kennedy delivered a re- markable speech on the celebrated Oregon bill, declaring himself in favor of the "fifty-four forty or fight" doctrine, gen- erally espoused by belligerent Democrats. So earnest was his delivery that he fainted

( 79 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

at the conclusion of his speech. Upon re- covery congratulations on his forensic effort were literally showered upon him. Among those who thus manifested their appreciation of natural oratory was John Quincy Adams, a bitter opponent of the Oregon measure. Approaching the "Blacksmith orator," the illustrious Mas- sachusetts statesman said : "Kennedy, let me take by the hand the greatest nat- ural orator in America." In one of his characteristic speeches in the Senate the "Little Giant of the West," Stephen A. Douglas, made this reference to the Con- gressman from the Muncie district: "I am reminded of the case of Hon. Andrew Kennedy, a Democratic member of Con- gress from Indiana, who, some years ago, was elected from a district which had about four thousand Whig majority. One day he got up to make a speech in the House, when one of his colleagues asked how he got there. He replied: 'I come from the strongest Whig district in the State of Indiana, a district that gave Gen- eral Harrison a bigger majority than any other in the United States of America. I beat three of the ablest Whigs there were in the district, and I could have beaten three more if they had dared to run against me.' "

David Wallace served but one term in Congress, from the Indianapolis district,

after having served six years as Lieuten- ant-Governor and three years as Gov- ernor. He was denied a re-election to the Twenty-eighth Congress. According to Woollen, "Governor Wallace was not a money-making and money-getting man. He took more pleasure in filling his mind with knowledge than in filling his pockets with money. He entered into a business venture at Fort Wayne, which, proving unfortunate, cost him his entire estate. One day, while sitting in his yard talking with his eldest son, the sheriff came with an execution which he sought to levy upon the Governor's property. After some parleying the sheriff left, and the Gov- ernor, addressing his son, said: 'William, I want you to remember that it will be a good deal better to have a few thousand dollars laid away for old age than to have been the Governor of the State or a mem- ber of Congress.'"

Henry Smith Lane was a native of Kentucky, served in the State Senate, filled the unexpired term of Tilghman A. Howard in Congress, was re-elected, and served in all from December 7, 1840, to March 3, 1843. He was strongly in favor of the Mexican war, in which he served as lieutenant-colonel of an Indiana regi- ment. He will receive further attention in subsequent chapters.

( 80 )

[CHAPTER IX.]

JESSE D. BRIGHT MADE U. S. SENATOR

TWICE ELECTED TO THAT EXALTED POSITION-NAMED AS INDIANA'S CHOICE FOR THE PRESIDENCY IN 1856

U NDER the constitution of 1816 Representatives in the State Legislature were elected an- nually, for one year; Senators for three years. The county of Jefferson, of which Madison then was and still is the county seat, was strongly Whig. In those days factional strife was easily engendered. The Whigs put in nomination for State Senator a rigid Sabbatarian who opposed Sunday mails. Assuming that the Demo- crats would not have the temerity to place a candidate of their own in the field, a more liberal faction of the Whig party trotted out a candidate of their way of thinking to oppose the regular nominee. Espying a fine opportunity to slip in be- tween these two Whig candidates, Jesse D. Bright entered the race and was tri- umphantly elected. He was a strong character, a man of affairs, a superb judge of human nature and an excellent mixer. He had served two years as Sen- ator when he was nominated by the De- mocracy for Lieutenant-Governor and after an animated campaign elected by a plurality exceeding four thousand. He made an excellent presiding officer and by his courtesy and fairness greatly en- deared himself to members of the General Assembly.

Previous to his election to these posi- tions he had served acceptably as Pro- bate Judge of Jefferson County and as United States Marshal for the State of In- diana. In the latter position he was afforded opportunity to form many acquaintances throughout the State. This doubtless contributed largely to his sub- sequent nomination and election to the office of Lieutenant-Governor.

When the term of Albert S. White as United State Senator was about to expire, in 1845, Governor Whitcomb let it become known that he would greatly appreciate the honor of an election to that high office. But the Lieutenant-Governor was a bet- ter politician than the Chief Executive. So Bright carried away the honors, and the Governor had to defer his Senatorial aspirations until 1849, when the expira- tion of Edward A. Hannegan's term made it possible for Whitcomb to step from the gubernatorial chair into the seat then about to be vacated by the man who as a "dark horse" snatched away the Sen- atorial honors from Tilghman A. Howard in 1843.

Though Bright had made himself quite solid with the party managers, opposition to his re-election developed in 1850. Robert Dale Owen, one of the ablest men in the State, had become an avowed can- didate for the succession. Charges were openly made that Bright sought to secure a re-election by bribery. He heard of it and hastened on to Indianapolis to defend himself. In an interview with Mr. Owen he easily proved his innocence of the charge preferred against him. Owen withdrew from the race and Bright was re-elected without further contest.

Though an intense partisan, Bright sustained friendly relations with Henry Clay. On some public measures these two Senators agreed and co-operated. And Bright stood high in the Senate. This was made manifest when, in 1853, upon the death of Vice-President King, the In- diana Senator was elected President pro tempore. This position he filled creditably until John C. Breckinridge was installed as Vice-President in 1857. While presid-

( 81)

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

ing officer of the Senate Mr. Bright re- existing since 1855. This program was fused to assign three anti-slavery Sen- ators-Charles Sumner, Salmon P. Chase and John P. Hale-to any of the standing committees, upon the ground that "they were not members of any healthy political organizations."

The death of Senator Whitcomb, after serving a few months more than half of his term, resulted in the appointment by Governor Joseph A. Wright, in the month of October, 1852, of Charles W. Cathcart, of Laporte county, to serve until the Legislature effected an election for the re- mainder of Senator Whitcomb's term. The choice of the Legislature of 1853 fell upon Judge John Pettit, of Lafayette. Dr. Graham N. Fitch, of Logansport, aspired to the position, but the caucus gave preference to Judge Pettit. The lat- ter served from the date of his election until March 4, 1855, when the Whitcomb term expired. The Legislature of 1855 was unable to agree upon a joint session for the election of a Senator, so for two years Indiana had but one representative in the Upper House of Congress. The Legislature of 1857, chosen in 1856, was Democratic on joint ballot, the House be- ing of that faith, while the Senate was controlled by a combination of Repub- licans, Freesoilers, Know-Nothings and Prohibitionists, styling itself for the time being "The People's Party."

Senator Bright's second term expired March 4, 1857. He was desirous of being made his own successor, but had doubts about the legality of an election in case a joint session could not be agreed upon by the two Houses of the General Assembly. The question was submitted to a commit- tee of three eminent jurists, who gave it as their opinion that an election effected by a majority of the entire membership of the Legislature would be valid. Thereupon it was decided to proceed to the election of two Senators-one to suc- ceed Bright, the other to fill the vacancy

carried out, and Bright and Fitch were duly commissioned by Governor Willard. The Legislature elected in 1858 was Re- publican. After a protracted debate the election of Bright and Fitch was de- clared to have been illegal and therefore null and void. That done, Henry S. Lane and William M. McCarty were chosen to fill the two alleged vacancies. These gen- tlemen proceeded to Washington and claimed the seats held by Bright and Fitch. Admission was refused Lane and . McCarty, although three distinguished Democrats-Douglas of Illinois, Mason of Virginia and Broderick of California- voted that the election of Bright and Fitch was irregular, illegal and therefore in- valid.

Bright had been unfriendly to Douglas for several years. The action just noted made him hate the "Little Giant" with all the intensity of his nature. He was as bitter in his enmity as he was cordial in his friendship. In such matters he toler- ated no middle ground. "He that is not for me is against me" guided his action throughout his political career. It is this that made him the relentless foe of Gov- ernor Joseph A. Wright, and to a some- what milder degree of Thomas A. Hen- dricks, David Turpie, Chas. W. Cathcart, W. J. Brown, W. A. Gorman, Robert Dale Owen, William S. Holman, and any num- ber of other distinguished Indiana Demo- crats who refused to conform to his wishes or to obey his commands.

It is said that when President-elect James Buchanan had under consideration the formation of his Cabinet he had Sen- ator Bright in view for Secretary of State. The accuracy of this statement may well be questioned for various rea- sons, chief of which is that Buchanan finally chose for this position General Lewis Cass of Michigan, a man of diplo- matic qualities, of conciliatory disposi-

( 82)

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

tion, eminent ability, and in several re- spects the very opposite of the Indiana Senator.

The strained relations existing between Senator Bright and Governor Wright did not deter the Democracy, in State conven- tion assembled at Indianapolis in Febru- ary, 1852, from giving these rival leaders this unqualified endorsement :

"Resolved, That we approve and endorse the administration of our present Gov- ernor, Joseph A. Wright, and that we pledge to him, as nominee for re-election in the approaching contest, our hearty support.

"Resolved, That we have undiminished confidence in the undeviating and well- tried Democracy of our distinguished and able Senators in Congress, James Whit- comb and Jesse D. Bright, and that we fully endorse their senatorial action."

At the same convention General Joseph Lane was warmly endorsed for the Presi- dential nomination. The delegation was not formally instructed to vote for Lane "first, last and all the time," but directed to vote as a unit. The delegation voted on thirty ballots for Lane, then went over to Cass. On the thirty-fifth ballot a "dark horse" in the person of Franklin Pierce was entered and nominated on the forty- ninth ballot.

In the convention of 1856 these endorse- ments were accorded the Senator and Governor:

"Resolved, That the Democracy of In- diana have undiminished confidence in the Hon. Jesse D. Bright, our Senator in Con- gress, and while we are ready cheerfully and enthusiastically to support for the presidency in the approaching election whoever may be selected as the candidate for that office by the Democratic national convention, from whatever quarter of the Union he may come-if the Northwest is honored with that distinction we present the name of the Honorable Jesse D. Bright to that convention, and to the Democracy of the Union, as a suitable candidate and one whom the Democracy of Indiana de- light to honor.

"Resolved, That the entire vote of the delegates from this State be cast as a unit

in the national convention and that a ma- jority of the delegation shall control the entire vote of the State.

"Resolved, That we approve of the ad- ministration of the State government by His Excellency, Joseph A. Wright, and that his integrity, ability and executive talents have fully met the expectations of the Democratic party of Indiana, and won for him increased confidence and gratitude from the people."

Though residing in Indiana, Senator Bright owned a plantation over in Ken- tucky. He was a slave-owner and in full accord with the South on the question of slavery. Fully aware that civil war would eventuate in the destruction of slavery, he counseled against secession and rebel- lion. But he could not persuade himself to believe that the Union could be kept to- gether by coercive methods. His sym- pathies being Southern, his affiliations naturally were with Southerners. As a slaveholder he was opposed to war being waged against the South. On the first day of March, 1861, while holding a seat in the United States Senate, he addressed a letter "To His Excellency, Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederation of States," in which he recommended his friend Thomas Lincoln of Texas to "favorable consideration as a gentleman of first re- spectability and reliable in every respect. He visits your capital mainly to dispose of what he regards a great improvement to firearms." The bearer of this letter was arrested on his way to the Confederate Capital with Senator Bright's letter upon his person. The matter was brought to the attention of the Senate; proceedings for expulsion were instituted, and after affording ample opportunity for defense, the Senate expelled Mr. Bright from the seat he had uninterruptedly occupied for sixteen years.

In the campaign of 1860 Senator Bright opposed both the nomination and election of Stephen A. Douglas to the Presidency. While he did not deem it advisable to put a State ticket in the field, he did bring into

( 83 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

the race a Breckinridge and Lane elector- al ticket. He entered upon a vigorous campaign, earnestly appealing to his old- time friends to stand by him in this crisis. Out of a total vote of 272,143 he managed to poll 12,295 for Breckinridge and Lane.

When a Democratic Legislature was elected in 1862 Mr. Bright did his utmost to induce the Democrats of that body to "vindicate" him with an election to his unexpired term in the Senate. This was refused, the choice of the party having been centered on Mr. Hendricks' running mate in 1860, David Turpie. Responsi- bility for this "slight" was laid at the door of Mr. Hendricks, whom Bright dubbed "Oily Gammon," but who nevertheless re- tained for an even quarter of a century the unquestioned and uncontested leader- ship of the Indiana Democracy.

Soon after the infliction of this sore disappointment Mr. Bright concluded to shake the dust of Indiana off his boots and to take up his residence on his plan- tation in Kentucky. He served two terms in the Legislature of that commonwealth and was at one time talked of for the United States Senatorship. He had ex- tensive interests in the coal mines of West Virginia, which afforded him a large in- come. In 1874 he moved to Baltimore. Broken down in health, he died in that city of organic disease of the heart, May 20, 1875.

Toward the close of the war Mr. Bright appears to have experienced some moder- ation of his ultra political views. He earnestly supported the reconciliation and reconstruction policy of President Johnson, and in 1868 favored the nomina- tion by the Democrats of Salmon P. Chase for the Presidency. In 1869 he wanted the Democrats of the Indiana Legislature to enter into a combination to elect one of the Republican bolters to the United States Senate, his choice being a former trusted lieutenant of his, Senator James Hughes, who, during the rebellion, joined

the Republican party. Like Clement L. Vallandigham, of Ohio, Jesse D. Bright believed in letting by-gones be by-gones, in gracefully accepting the decree of fate, and acquiescing in changes that could not be prevented. In other words, he believed in the advisability of what in Ohio was dubbed "the new departure." In a speech delivered by Mr. Hendricks in 1872 he ex- pressed substantially the same idea when he said: "Let us turn our backs upon the past and look hopefully to the future."

THE BRIGHT-FITCH SENATORIAL CONTEST.

In view of the importance of this case and the general misconception of the points involved therein, the reader will doubtless appreciate highly the presentation of the legal aspect by an authority of the em- inence of Judge David Turpie. As a member of the General Assembly of 1859 he bore a conspicuous part in the animated contest over the proposition to annul the action of the preceding Legislature. What he had to say on this interesting subject is well worth studious perusal :

"As upon my former service in the Gen- eral Assembly, so now, came again the question of the senatorial election, as the first business of the session of 1858, which arose in the following manner: the Legis- lature of 1855, chosen in 1854, had the duty imposed upon it of choosing a United States Senator. But the two houses of that body being of different political faith, de- clined to go into joint convention for that purpose. The vacancy caused by the ex- piration of Mr. Pettit's term was not filled, and for two years Indiana had only one member in the Senate, Mr. Jesse D. Bright. The Legislature of 1857, chosen in 1856, was Democratic on joint ballot; of its two branches the House was Democratic, the Senate was controlled by the opposition.

"Under these circumstances the House appointed a day for the election of two Senators, one to fill the vacancy existing since 1855, the other to fill the vacancy about to occur by the expiration of Mr. Bright's term. The Senate, as such, ig-

( 84 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

nored this action of the House, but the Democratic members of that body left their seats in the Senate Chamber, came over to the House on the day appointed, organized a joint convention and elected Doctor Graham N. Fitch to fill the existing vacancy, and Mr. Jesse D. Bright as his own successor for a third term, each of them receiving a majority of all the votes of all the members elected to the General Assembly. The opposition in our State, and especially that of the Legislature of 1858, including the anti-administration Democrats, held that the election of Bright and Fitch so conducted was unconstitu- tional and invalid; that both vacancies were yet unfilled and that it was their duty to elect two Senators. They took the ground that the word Legislature, in the clause of the federal constitution relating to the election of Senators, necessarily im- plied the concurrent action of both Houses as such to form a lawful joint convention. We contended, on the contrary, that the word Legislature was not used in any tech- nical sense in the clause referred to, and that the majority of the whole number of members might legally form a joint con- vention and elect Senators without such concurrent action. In support of this con- struction we referred to the fact that, at the time of making the federal constitu- tion, several of the States, notably Penn- sylvania, had a Legislature composed of only one chamber, and that the framers of that instrument, sitting in Philadelphia, could not possibly have contemplated the two houses as such in the use of the term Legislature, but had used it as we still use the word magistracy, to designate the col- lective body of all the persons in the coun- ty or State who are employed in the duty of administering justice.

"The debate lasted many days; in the House it became quite warm and exciting; the Speaker, Mr. Gordon, left the chair to take part in it; at last a vote was taken and we were beaten. No further resist- ance was offered. We kept our seats, took no part in the proceedings, and our col- leagues of the opposition held a joint con- vention in which they chose Mr. Henry S. Lane and Mr. William M. McCarty as Sen- ators from Indiana to fill the supposed vacancies. I wrote a full argument upon the law and facts of the case, closing with an earnest request for federal legislation on this question, which was seconded by

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 the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916, Part 11

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926 Publication date: 1917 Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co. Number of Pages: 1104

Author: Stoll, John B., 1843-1926
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Indianapolis : Indiana Democratic Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1104