History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916, Part 17

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 17

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).

The history of the relations between the United States and Great Britain in the last hundred years is a testament to the efficiency of arbitration, when two nations really desire a peaceful settlement. The disputes over the Maine boundary, the fishery claims, the Oregon dispute, the Klondike frontier difference, the regula- tion of pelagic sealing, were all of as much

The first territorial acquisition of the United States was that of Louisiana from France. It was the largest real estate deal ever accomplished by friendly na- tions. The United States paid approxi- mately $15,000,000 for more than 875,000 square miles of territory.

Spain had acquired Louisiana in 1763 when France retired from America. It controlled the mouth of the Mississippi river, the free passage of which early be- came a point of dispute with the United States. By 1802 a temporary settlement was made, when the United States learned of the secret treaty of San Ildefonso, whereby Spain gave Louisiana back to France.

More disputes about the river followed. Feeling ran high in the new Republic. Jingoes advocated war with France to force better treatment. President Jeffer- son believed France might be persuaded to sell the island of New Orleans and that strip of the present Mississippi and Ala- bama between the thirty-first parallel and the Gulf of Mexico. The boundary of the United States then stopped at the thirty- first parallel.

Robert R. Livingston, the American minister in Paris, was instructed to pro- pose that matter to Napoleon, then first Consul.º James Monroe was sent to as- sist Mr. Livingston. France received the proposal with disfavor. War talk was heard again in the United States, when suddenly Napoleon, through Talleyrand and Marquis de Marbois, his minister of

( 125 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

finance, offered to sell to the Republic not only the island and small strip of land, but the entire province of Louisiana.

The first price asked was 120,000,000 francs, with the assumption of all the province's debts by the purchaser. Amer- ica might have bought at that price, but as Napoleon was anxious to replenish his war chest to fight England, he lowered his terms. Ultimately the price was fixed at $15,000,000, and April 30, 1803, the prov- ince of Louisiana became American.

The wording of the treaty conveying Louisiana was vague, and soon the United States became embroiled with Spain over the strip between the gulf and the thirty- first parallel. Spain claimed that terri- tory belonged to Florida, then a Spanish province, and had never been retrans- ferred to France.

Spain maintained its position, and in 1810 the inhabitants of the western part of the strip rebelled, organized an inde- pendent republic and then asked to be an- nexed to the United States. American troops took possession without any an- nexation formalities. In 1812 the area of American control was extended farther East. After England used Florida for a military base in the war of 1812, the dis- pute between Spain and the United States became more acute, and finally a confer- ence was held to adjust all difficulties.

It resulted in Florida being ceded to the United States, Spain releasing all claim to the strip mentioned before. In return the United States agreed to take over all claims of American citizens against Spain up to $5,000,000 and pay some expenses and debts of the province, all aggregating about $5,500,000. The United States also gave up its claim to some territory west of the Sabine river in the present Texas.

The United States made several efforts to acquire Texas before it was annexed. In 1827 an offer of $1,000,000 was made. Two years later $5,000,000 were offered. .

Mexico refused. In 1836 the Mexican provinces of Texas and Coahuila seceded and organized an independent republic under the name of Texas. It tried repeat- edly to enter the United States, but not until 1845 was the annexation completed and the Republic of Texas disestablished. No money was paid for Texas, but the people of the State were rewarded by the increased protection they enjoyed as a part of the United States. Later the State was paid $10,000 for lands ceded to the general Government in the adjustment of its boundaries.

With Texas the United States also acquired a quarrel with Mexico over the territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces river. The Texas declaration of independence had named the Rio Grande as the southwestern boundary. Mexico claimed the more northern stream was correct. The United States chose to up- hold the Texas contention, which brought on the Mexican war of 1846-48.

Uncle Sam's action in that war rather smacks of conquest, but he sugar-coated the forcible seizure of New Mexico and California by paying Mexico for them. The price was $18,250,000, $3,250,000 of which was to liquidate spoliation claims of American citizens against Mexico.

Some writers have tried to show that the United States contemplated only seiz- ing the strip between the Nueces and Rio Grande when the war began, but the ex- igencies of the struggle made it necessary to take other land. Such attempts are futile. The United States took California and New Mexico by force, justifying its action by the knowledge that a great rich region was kept undeveloped by a back- ward nation, and paying a gold compensa- tion. Had a European nation been in Uncle Sam's place in 1848, Mexico would have been stripped not only of land, for which it was paid, but money as well. Mexico was paid $3,000,000 down and $12,000,000 in four annual payments.

( 126 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

During the Mexican war the United States also acquired clear title to another large and valuable tract of land-Oregon Territory. England laid some claim to it, but an arbitration conference awarded it to the United States in 1846.

In 1854 the United States made its last acquisition of contiguous territory. In that year a strip of land, now known as the Gadsden purchase, was acquired. Mexico was given $10,000,000 for it, an excellent price. It provided a way for a trans-continental railroad.

The contemplation of such a record is well calculated to arouse in Democratic breasts a spirit of exuberance and exulta- tion. With pardonable pride it may be re- ferred to as a splendid vindication of Democratic judgment and fortitude in holding out determinedly against the whimsical, hysterical and at times vicious attitude of the Whigs in opposing both the annexation of Texas and the war against Mexico. Steering clear of that which might be considered vainglorious boastful- ness, there is abundant justification for bringing to popular attention the magni- tude of that marvelous territorial expan- sion under which a mighty nation thrives and prospers between two great oceans. In fitting terms the splendor of this achievement is vividly brought within the grasp and comprehension of the present generation by a veteran Democratic jour- nalist who for many years championed and vitalized Democratic doctrines in In- diana. His admirable production richly merits a conspicuous place in this volume :

ACHIEVEMENTS OF DEMOCRACY. (By Major Geo. E. Finney, Editor of the Martinsville Democrat.)

"There are times and occasions when opponents of Democracy opprobriously ap- ply such terms as 'Bourbon,' 'negative quantity,' and 'unprogressive plodders' to the party that prides itself as having had Thomas Jefferson as its founder. By way of rejoinder it may be said that in only

one particular are the Democrats Bour- bons. They early learned and imbibed the spirit of the constitution. Its meaning in the early days is in no sense different from its meaning now. To that instrument they have clung through all the changing years. As to it they have learned nothing new, nor have they forgotten its spirit and its teachings. Thus far and no farther are they Bourbons.

"A 'negative party'? Let's see. It put its impress upon the Declaration of Inde- pendence; it materially assisted in orig- inating the Government, providing those wise measures and supporting them em- bodied in the constitution under which the country has passed through one hundred and twenty-five years of unexampled pros- perity and happiness; under which the country has been brought safely through every trouble that is likely to frown upon us, and under which, aided by superb statesmanship, indomitable courage and confidence in man's ability for a patriotic self-government, it has avoided the rock upon which other countries have split. While these are material achievements whose influence envelop us by night and make the air around us pure by day, they are not such things as those upon which a measure may be put and their value cal- culated by dollars and cents, or their ex- tent measured by leagues and furlongs. But the party is to be credited with large achievements of this character, too, as-

"Take a map of the United States, trace a line beginning near Fernandina, Fla., on the north line of that State, west, with an offset to the north at Chattahoochee river to the Mississippi, thence with that river to its source, and over a stretch of coun- try still further north till the line inter- sects Rainy Lake river, near its issuance from the Lake of the Woods; from this point east along the lake line, St. Lawrence river and the northeast boundary to the ocean, thence along the coast line to the place of beginning. Within this boundary is found the original area of the United States, embracing 827,080 square miles of territory.

"The total area in square miles of the United States (excluding Florida and Alaska) is 2,967,226. Deduct from this grand total the original area, in square miles thus-2,967,226 minus 827,080, and there results 2,180,146. These figures represent the territory which, through the

( 127 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

clear foresight and the splendid diplomacy of the Democratic party, was acquired and, without war or conquest, added to this country.

"Though Florida was acquired by pur- chase as a result of a compromise on the Rio Grande-Sabine river boundary line dispute under a Democratic President, yet it is excluded from the count for the rea- son that the purchase was accomplished during the 'era of good feeling'-a notable period when no political parties were bat- tling for supremacy-and therefore the Democracy is not entitled to exclusive credit. Nor is Alaska, because that icicle was the gift of the Republican party. But all the contiguous accessions besides the Democratic party gave to the country, and all of this splendid heritage was acquired in the face of opposition, some of it reach- ing if not to treasonable, at least to most unpatriotic, utterances.

"A magnificent domain in itself! Its northern boundary stretches out for six- teen hundred miles before reaching the Pacific; its coast line eighteen hundred miles; its southern line two thousand miles, and its river line the whole length of the Mississippi and more. Within this boundary is found a land of varied condi- tion, but most of which contains elements of wealth to the people and to the Gov- ernment. Its auriferous ores glisten in the eyes of the world; the products of its grazing grounds reach the sea and cross it ; its golden cereal is quoted in the world's great marts; its luscious fruits gladden the palates of the peoples of many climes, and its grand scenery attracts the lovers of the beautiful from far and near. Upon every league of this vast expanse-from the mouth of the Father of Waters to the far-away Cape Flattery, from the Gila to the Lake of the Woods-the Democratic footprint is seen and the sign-manual of the party of Jefferson is writ in characters of unfading glory.

"The area of accessions is more than two and a half times larger than the orig- inal country, conquered from England. In a national sense the value of this achieve- ment cannot be computed, but a few minutes' thought will open the mind to its vast importance. In the absence of this addition of territory, the Mississippi and an imaginary line north of its source would have been its boundary on the west, and the great breadth of lands between it

and the Pacific coast owned and occupied by foreign peoples. He that has read his- tory, even very recent history, will recog- nize at once the danger of such a line in case of trouble with national neighbors, and the cost of maintaining defenses along such a stretch of boundary, both in times of peace as well as war. The clear fore- sight of Jefferson appreciated this danger and sought to avert it. Again, to our country had been invited the oppressed people of other nations to find asylum and home within our borders. And the people came. It was easy enough to see that in the coming years more territory would be needed, and this thought added strength to the purpose.

"Following in the steps of Jefferson, the later Democracy saw safety, national security and commercial value in pushing the boundary farther west, for on the sea line a boundary was to be found, secure in its permanency, dependable in its strength and economical in its keep, in that it would require few fortifications and its liability to incursions be negligible. It requires little fancy to conjure up the succession of quarrels, brawls, raids and disturbances of various kinds that always characterize the people along such a boundary as

that which Jefferson saw. As a testimony to this con- template the late and present con- dition on our Mexican border. Then would we sigh with a vain regret over the 'what might have been' if the tide had been taken at its flood. But, thanks to the Democratic party, such imaginings were anticipated. The wis- dom of its leaders dictated the course that was to redound to the glory and welfare of the Nation. Schooled in the revolution, their minds expanded with the happy close of the great struggle, and they saw with a prescient eye the grand possibilities of the years to come.

"When the young man has studied the parties with a view to choosing party affiliations, and has, as well as he may, mastered the principles and policies of the contending parties of today, he will feel a pride in allying himself with the De- mocracy. In the contemplation of its grand and worthy past, he will feel that he has in some sort a part and parcel in its grand achievements."

( 128 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

PROPHECIES OF WOE GONE AWRY.

Viewing with supreme satisfaction the events that brought about the immense ex- pansion of Uncle Sam's territory, it may not be amiss to note the predictions of woe that were elicited as a result of the firm stand taken by the statesmen who cham- pioned the policy of a greater American Union. After the occupation of California by the United States, Sidney Smith pre- dicted that "This marks the end of the great American Republic, for a people spread over such a vast area, having such diversified interests and separated by such natural barriers, cannot hold together."

His logic was perfect and his conclu- sions eminently correct, but for a totally unexpected occurrence-the invention of the telegraph. The telegraph was in use then, but no one saw even dimly its possi- bilities.

The necessity of binding together the peoples of vast nations by means of rapid communication had been worrying the world for some time. The Russian gov- ernment went so far as to build 220 sema- phore towers from the Russian frontier to St. Petersburg, by way of Warsaw, 1,200 miles. Thirteen hundred operators were employed, and a semaphore, on the plan of the present railway signal, but with many more arms, was used.

In 1832 similar systems were in use in France and Prussia and one word could be signaled from Paris to Toulon, 475 miles, in twelve minutes. These systems were hardly established, at tremendous expense, when Professor Morse knocked them into a cocked hat.

What a howl was raised when Jeffer- son consummated the celebrated Louisiana Territory purchase. When its ratification came up in Congress Josiah Quincy of Massachusetts rose and tore hair. Jeffer- son was an "idiot" and a "madman," and

Massachusetts was going to secede if this monkey business went any further.

"This constitution never was intended to be and never can be strained to lay all over the wilderness of the West without essentially affecting the rights and con- sciences of its proprietors," he declared. "Why, sir, I have heard of six new States, and some say there will be, at no great dis- tance of time, more. It was not for them that this constitution was adopted. You have no authority to throw the rights and liberties of the people of the United States into a hotchpot with the wild men on the Missouri, or the mixed, though more re- spectable, Anglo-Hispano-Gallo-Americans who bask on the sands of the Mississippi. New States are intended to be formed be- yond the Mississippi. There is no limit to man's imagination on this subject short of California and the Columbia river."

The "wild men on the Missouri" con- stitute a mighty force. They are an im- portant factor in the galaxy of States. Their number is counted by millions. But please don't judge harshly of Josiah Quincy. How could he, in the days of his activity, have foreseen the networks of railroads, the myriads of telegraph poles and wires, the wondrous performance of the telephone and the other cords which are yet to make the Columbia and the Hudson next door neighbors?

Viewing ever so kindly and consider- ately the dire predictions made by some of the sages of the remote past, let us not lose sight of the comforting fact that not a single slave territory or new slave State was carved out of all the vast territory an- nexed and acquired from Mexico! Verily, poor prophets were the politicians and statesmen who, in those days, protested so vehemently against the expansion cham- pioned and accomplished by the party of Jefferson, Jackson and Polk.

5-History

( 129 )

[CHAPTER XVII.] INDIANA'S SECOND CONSTITUTION

THE FIRST ONE SEEMINGLY SATISFIED THE PEOPLE FOR THIRTY-FIVE YEARS

AKING into consideration the I fact that the framers of In- diana's first constitution re- quired only nineteen days wherein to perform the task assigned to them, it must be conceded that they quite suc- ceeded in meeting the wishes of the people whom they served. Provision had been made in that document for subsequent changes at relatively short intervals, yet the people indicated their unwillingness to avail themselves of that privilege by wait- ing thirty-five years before they sup- planted the old with the new.

The assumption is thus warranted that the men who made the Constitution of 1816 did a good job, not alone for the im- mediate present and the near future, but for a succeeding generation. Moreover, their product must have given unfeigned satisfaction to the wise men at Washing- ton, in congress assembled, for that august body not only placed its stamp of approval upon the newly-made constitution, but re- lieved the people of the infant common- wealth of the necessity of passing thereon by popular vote. That no false notion may find lodgment in the Hoosier mind as to this having been an exhibition of parti- ality and favoritism the further statement is vouchsafed that Ohio at the time of its admission into the Union was favored in like manner. Congress evidently believed in those days that when the people of a Territory knocking for admission into the Union are authorized to select the men charged with the framing of their future organic law, such selection ought to be made with the understanding that their acts shall be final and not subject to ap- proval or rejection by the populace.

That this belief was founded upon rea- son and sound judgment is evidenced by the excellence of the work actually done. Both Ohio and Indiana got along very well for many years with their respective State constitutions, though neither document had first been submitted to popular vote.

Whether the Constitution of 1851 is a marked improvement upon the Constitu- tion of 1816 is neither the purpose nor the province of this publication to determine. There is just one phase to which attention is being directed, and that is whether the welfare of the State was enhanced by making State officers other than Governor and Lieutenant-Governor elective by the people. To reach a just conclusion with reference to this, let comparisons be insti- tuted and let the verdict be rendered in conformity with actual experience-the only real test. The question to be passed upon is whether a better class of men have been chosen for Secretary of State, Au- ditor and Treasurer under the Constitu- tion of 1851 than were chosen under the provisions of the Constitution of 1816?

Discussion of the relative merits of the two methods of choosing State officials has developed a pronounced sentiment in favor of the system in operation in Pennsylvania since the adoption of that State's new con- stitution in 1872. To Charles R. Buck- alew, for many years the idolized leader of the Keystone Democracy, is mainly due the credit for having brought about the change under consideration. In all its his- tory, Pennsylvania never had a long list of State officers to choose by popular vote. Under the present system the people of Pennsylvania elect only four State officers, to wit: Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Treasurer and Secretary of Internal

( 131 )

HISTORY INDIANA DEMOCRACY-1816-1916

Affairs, besides Judges of the Supreme and Appellate Courts. Secretary of State, Auditor, Attorney-General, Superintend- ent of Public Instruction, etc., are all ap- pointed by the Governor. These officials constitute the Governor's Cabinet. This Cabinet is, in so far as feasible, patterned after the President's Cabinet at Washing- ton. It has worked excellently in Penn- sylvania, so much so that during a period covering four decades not even a sugges- tion has been ventured to supplant it with some other plan or system. The official business of the State is transacted far more expeditiously and efficiently than under the elective system, and the Gov- ernor is afforded far greater opportunity to devote his time and attention to mat- ters properly pertaining to his office than is possible in our State. If enlightenment on this subject is needed, let any one spend a day at the State House at Indianapolis and make note of the innumerable trivial things that are from day to day thrust upon the attention of Governor Ralston. Under the so-called Federal (or cabinet) plan all matters are referred to the proper department and attended to by the proper person. Three or four of our Indiana Governors have had their lives shortened by the tremendous pressure brought on them as a result of the onerous and de- structive system in vogue at our State Capitol.

But the real purpose of these pages is to record the manner and circumstances under which the Constitution of 1816 was discarded and the Constitution of 1851 brought into existence. As tersely set forth in Moore's "A Century of Indiana," the change was brought about for these reasons and in this manner :

"Feeling that the State had outgrown its first constitution, and the need of many changes being apparent, the people voted affirmatively in 1850 upon a proposition to call a constitutional convention. The convention convened at Indianapolis, Oc- tober 7, 1850, and continued in session un-

til February 10, 1851. It was composed of one hundred and fifty delegates, and the wisdom of their work in framing a new constitution is generally recognized. The constitution framed and adopted by the convention was later ratified by the people at the polls and became the funda- mental law of the State. It went into effect November 1, 1851. The vote upon its adoption stood-109,310 yeas and 26,- 755 nays. A separate ballot was taken on the thirteenth article, which resulted in its adoption by substantially the same vote.

"The thirteenth article forbade the com- ing into the State of any negro or mulatto; made contracts entered into with any such void and provided fines against citizens who should employ or otherwise encour- age negroes to remain in the State. Fines so assessed were to be set aside as a fund for colonizing any negroes already in the State, or their descendants, who should be willing to immigrate. This article was stricken out by an amendment ratified by vote of the people in 1881.

"The new constitution also limited the suffrage to white voters and provided that only white males over the age of twenty- one years should be considered in fixing the basis of representation in the General Assembly. By amendments adopted in 1881 the word 'white' was stricken out wherever it appeared in the constitution, thus ending discrimination between the races and admitting the negro to the fran- chise and full rights of citizenship.

"Among the important changes made by the new constitution from the provi- sions of the old were: The power of ap- pointing supreme court judges was tak- en from the Governor, and all judicial offi- cers were made elective by the people; the Secretary, Treasurer and Auditor of State were made elective by the people instead of by the Legislature; sessions of the Legislature were made biennial instead of annual; the Legislature was forbidden to pass local or special laws; a system of gen- eral banking laws was provided for and the State prohibited from becoming a stockholder in any banking or other corpo- ration."

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 17

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