USA > Kansas > A standard history of Kansas and Kansans, Volume II > Part 35
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65
1st Lt. and Asst, Surg.
Charles S. Sunday
Topeka
, June 27, '98 .. . . June 27. '98.
. Mustered in as Ist Lt, and Asst. Surg. ; honorably disc. Dec, 24, '98
Fred'k D. G Harvey
Kansas City, Kan.
June 28, '98
.... June 28, '98
. Mustered in as 1st Lt. and Asst. Surg ; honorably disc. Dec. 24, '98
Sergoant Major
Jones. Theophulis T.
Topeka
July 2. '98
July 19, '98.
. Mustered in as Sergt Co. H; pro. Sergt. Maj. Oct. 3, '98; mustered out with regt.
Q. M. Sergeant
Harris, Arthur C.
. Topeka
., July 2. '98
.. . July 2, '98 ..
. Mustered in as Q. M. Sergt, Co. A; red. tn rks. Aug. 20, '98; pro, Sergt. Sept. 6, '98; pro. Regt Q. M. Sergt. Oct. 12, '98; mustered out with regt.
Hospital Steward
White. James F.
Topeka July 18, '98.
. July 18, '98.
. Mustered in as Hosp. Stew. : mustered out with regt.
Patterson, Robert E
Kansas City, Kan. July 2, '98. . July 9, '98
Mustered in as Sergt. Co {': pro. Hosp. Stew. Aug 8, '98: mustered out with regt.
KANSAS AND KANSANS
July 9, '98 Mustered in as 2d Lt. Co. C; detailed Batt. Adj. July 15, '08: appointed acting Regt. Ad). July 27. '98; mustered out with regt,
921
KANSAS AND KANSANS
officers were all men of intelligence, and the enlisted men obedient and prompt in the performance of all duties required of them, and the regi- ment received the commendation of the officers under whose command it served. The state of Kansas may be well proud of the record of the Twenty-third Kansas.
SPECIAL ARTICLES
THE LECOMPTON MOVEMENT BY RALPH R. PRICE
The Kansas-Nebraska Bill gave to the new territory of Kansas more notoriety than any other territory that has ever been organized. The territorial struggle of "bleeding Kansas" kept the name prominently before the eyes of the nation. The bountiful crops of sunny Kansas have become known throughout the world. Prairie fires and blizzards, drouths and floods and grasshoppers, boom-times and hard-times have each in turn advertised Kansas. Kansas sent more soldiers to the Union army than she had voters when Sumter fell. A larger per cent of her citizens joined the Union army than of any other state or territory. After the Civil war, Kansas became distinctly the soldier state of the Union.
Kansans believe they are of a superior race-a select people. The Puritans sought the new world to gain privileges for themselves : but the Kansans were missionaries-crusaders who conquered both nature and the pro-slavery powers in order to give to the world a new, free commonwealth. Kansans feel that they have a reputation to uphold wherever they may go.
In short, Kansas has been more advertised than any other state that ever entered the Union. She also had more constitutions than any other territory that ever sought statehood. Verily her struggle "to the stars" was "through difficulties." The slave-holding interests regarded Kansas as the last possible chance they would ever have of gaining one more slave state to counterbalance California which had given to freedom a majority of one state in the United States Senate.
From many points of view, the most important phase of the struggle over the admission of Kansas to statehood was the contest waged both in Congress and in Kansas over the notorious Lecompton constitution. In order clearly to understand this Lecompton movement, we need to recall certain pertinent preceding facts in our national history.
We recall the acrimonious contest over the annexation of Texas; and when we note the significant fact that the admission of Texas gave the slave power a majority of two states in the United States Senate, together with the fact that Texas was the last slave-state ever admitted, we appre- ciate more clearly the reason for the contest over its admission. This was in 1845. Then came the admission of Iowa in 1846, and of Wisconsin in 1848. The two sections were now equally balanced. The admission of California in the Compromise of 1850 gave the free North a majority of one, for the first time since the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
Kansas was the next territory to apply for statehood. If admitted as
925
·
926
KANSAS AND KANSANS
a slave state, the balance in the United States Senate would be held equal, and the southern minority would here still have a check on what they chose to call "the tyranny of the [ northern] majority." The South felt that they must have Kansas in order to protect themselves in the United States Senate. Moreover, the southern boundary of Kansas is farther south than any other free state, while the northern boundary of Kansas is almost identical with the original Mason and Dixon line. Hence, the South thought that Kansas should of right be theirs. On the other hand, Douglas believed that slavery would never flourish in Kansas sufficiently to make Kansas a slave state.
Kansas was organized as a territory by the famous Kansas-Nebraska Bill, which became law by the signature of President Franklin Pierce on May 30, 1854. Stephen A. Douglas is the one man who, more than any other, secured the passage of this bill. His home was in Chicago, Illinois. For years he had wished to convert the western Indian country into an organized territory in order to induce settlers to move into this promising region, and thus build up the great Northwest. More recently he had come to desire specifically to secure the organization of this territory in order to promote the building of a railroad from Chicago to the Pacific. The most important rival for this Pacific road was a group of shrewd southern men, of whom Jefferson Davis was a leader. These men wished a southern road, built in part at national expense. The promoters of this southern route had won a marked victory in securing the annexation of Texas in 1845. They won again in securing the organization of the Terri- tory of New Mexico in 1850, together with the admission of California to statehood. The climax of their victories from the standpoint of their railroad scheme was the Gadsden Purchase, in 1853. Thus by 1854 they had secured a very desirable route through a region already organized into states and territories.
In order to secure the consideration of a railroad from Chicago west to the Pacific, Douglas must first transform into an organized territory the vast Nebraska region, now occupied by Indians, but through which his road was to be built. Moreover, since the Gadsden Purchase of 1853, it was evident that there was need of haste in organizing this northern territory or the southern road would soon be built. The chief opposition came from the South. This was partly because of the South's own rail- road plans. Chiefly, however, the South opposed the organization of this northern Nebraska Territory because to organize this territory would be the first step toward the admission to statehood of a region forever devoted to freedom by the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
Certain southern statesmen, chief of whom were Jefferson Davis and Senator David R. Atchison, of Missouri, made it clear to Douglas that they would never agree to the organization of this Louisiana Territory north of 36° 30' unless the Missouri Compromise were repealed, and this territory opened to popular sovereignty. Now it happens that Senator Douglas thoroughly believed in the principle of popular sovereignty. He had a westerner's confidence in the ability of the people to decide their own questions for themselves. He believed this was a sound principle of
927
KANSAS AND KANSANS
popular, democratic government. As a matter of fact, he believed slavery to be forever excluded from Kansas by the law of nature, and in this events proved him to be right. Moreover, this was the very principle that had been applied in New Mexico and Utah, the last territories to be organized. In fact, Douglas had himself written the popular sovereignty clauses in the bills that organized these latest territories. He now incor- porated the very same clause in the Kansas and Nebraska bills. The Compromise of 1850 had been quite universally accepted. It had allayed the slavery storm-had taken this vexatious slavery question out of national politics and had relegated it as a mere local issue to be settled by the people in New Mexico and Utah, where it had actually worked for the interests of freedom. Why should not the same clause work like- wise in Kansas ?
It has been asserted that Douglas was looking to the presidency. He was, and justly so. In-so-far as this fact entered into the Kansas- Nebraska Bill, he thought the principle of popular sovereignty would eliminate from national politics a vexatious and troublesome issue, and would transform slavery into a merely local issue with which a candi- date for President would not need to concern himself. Otherwise, he must face this issue in his national activities, including his race for the presidency. The one interesting fact that the free-state settlers of Lawrence, Kansas, named their county Douglas would at least suggest a refutation of the charge that Douglas became the special champion of slavery.
He repeatedly declared that personally he did not care whether slavery were voted up or voted down in Kansas. We recall that while Douglas was a New Englander by birth, he was a westerner by education, and a southerner by annexation-he had married a southern woman who fell heir to a large number of slaves. Moreover, Douglas represented a state that was divided on the question of slavery, the state where Senator Thomas, author of the Missouri Compromise, had lived. Once more we recall Douglas' conviction that slavery was really excluded from Kansas by the law of nature-that by a fair application of the principle of popular sovereignty this territory would never become a slave state. In this he was right. Few slaves ever came to Kansas. To apply the prin- ciple of popular sovereignty here would be to give the South every chance they could ask, while the ultimate victory would be with the North.
Thus it happened that Douglas acceded to the southern demands, repealed the Missouri Compromise, and organized the territories of Kansas and Nebraska on the principle of popular sovereignty. But Kansas was not left to a natural growth, nor a fair application of the principle of popular sovereignty. The North at once started a crusade "to make the West the homestead of the free." And, as already noted, this was the "last ditch" for the slave forces. Here they made their last stand. They recognized a state of war, and used every means to secure a victory.
In the first election held in the new Territory of Kansas, and again in the second, the slave interests used notoriously fraudulent methods to
928
KANSAS AND KANSANS
earry the elections, and thereby gained control of the new territorial government. In the first election, held November 29, 1854, for the elee- tion of a delegate to Congress, John W. Whitfield, the pro-slavery candi- date was elected by a vote of 2,258 out of a total vote of 2,833; but it was estimated that 1,729 of the votes cast for him were fraudulent. So, in the election of the Legislature, March 30, 1855, pro-slavery hordes eame over the border from Missouri, and out of a total vote of 6,307 the pro-slavery party cast 5,427, and of these it was estimated that 4,908 were illegal. Thus popular sovereignty was utterly discredited, for this fraud- ulently eleeted government in Kansas was recognized and supported by the National Government. Under these eireumstances, in order to free themselves from the fraudulent pro-slavery dominanee, the free-state settlers in Kansas determined to prepare a constitution and apply for statehood without waiting for the usual enabling act from Congress. This movement was led by Dr. Charles Robinson, who had participated in a similar movement in California after the inrush there of the "Forty- niners." The result was the Topeka constitution. This was, of course, the act of the free-state people alone, and was without any formal, legal sanetion. Nevertheless, when sent to Congress, the House of Representa- tives was willing to aeeept this Topeka constitution, thus admitting Kansas to statehood, but the Senate rejected it. The next step in pre- paring a constitution for Kansas was taken by the pro-slavery party, and is known as the Lecompton movement.
After the fraudulent election of the first legislature in October of 1855, the free-state party had refused to take part in the election of the second legislature, in October of 1856. This legislature, thus controlled by slave interests, now determined to eall a convention to frame a state constitution. Governor Geary vetoed the measure, but it was passed over his veto. The persistent aetion of the pro-slavery faction finally led to the governor's resignation, Mareh 4, 1857, the day on which Presi- dent Buchanan was inaugurated. The new President appointed Robert J. Walker, of Mississippi, as governor, and Frederick P. Stan- tou, of Tennessee, as secretary of Kansas. Walker was a man of unusual ability, fearless, and fair minded. He had served as United States senator, and had been secretary of the treasury under Polk. Before accepting the arduous task of governor of Kansas, he had secured the positive assurance from President Buchanan that any constitution prepared in Kansas should be fully submitted to the people of the terri- tory for a fair vote.
The election of delegates to the Lecompton convention was held June 15, 1857. Though Governor Walker urged all to participate in this elec- tion, the free-state men still refrained from voting; so that out of the very defective registration of 9,251 voters, not more than 2,200 cast their ballots. This vote revealed the fact that the free-state men were now in a clear majority in the territory, and that hereafter they would certainly control any eleetion that might be fairly held.
The election of the next legislature oeeurred October 5th and 6th of this same year, 1857. Governor Walker gave his positive assurance that this election should be fairly conducted, and both parties now took part,
929
KANSAS AND KANSANS
with the result that a free-state majority was elected to each house of the new legislature. Meanwhile, the convention had assembled at Lecompton in September, but had adjourned till after this election. They now re- assembled on October 19th, and continued in session till November 7th, conscious of the fact that they did not at all represent the majority of the voters now in the territory.
The constitution produced by this convention raised a storm of pro- test both in Kansas and in the nation at large, but especially in the national Congress. It provided for the return of fugitive slaves by the civil officers of the proposed state. The twenty-third section of the bill of rights read, "Free negroes shall not be permitted to live in this State under any circumstances." We note that this is almost identical with the objectionable section in Missouri's constitution of 1820. The seventh article of the Lecompton constitution was entirely devoted to the subject of slavery. It provided that "The right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction, and the right of the owner of a slave to such slave and its increase is the same, and as inviolable as the right of the owner of any property whatever." In the second section it pro- vided that "The legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of the owners, or without paying the owners previous to their emancipation a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated. They shall have no power to pre- vent emigrants to the State from bringing with them such persons as are deemed slaves by the laws of any one of the United States or Territories, so long as any person of the same age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this State." Section three provides that "In the prosecution of slaves for crimes of higher grade than petit larceny, the legislature shall have no power to deprive them of an impartial trial by a petit jury." Section four reads, "Any person who shall maliciously dismember or deprive a slave of life shall suffer such punishment as would be inflicted in case the like offence had been committed on a free white person, and on the like proof, except in case of insurrection of such slave."
The Lecompton convention, before it adjourned, provided that the vote on this constitution should be taken December 21, 1857. It further provided that at this election "The constitution framed by this conven- tion shall be submitted to all the white male inhabitants of the territory of Kansas in the said Territory upon that day, and over the age of twenty-one years, for ratification or rejection, in the following manner and form : The voting shall be by ballot. The ballots cast at said election shall be endorsed, 'Constitution with slavery,' and 'Constitution with no slavery.' " It further provided that "If upon examination of the poll- books. it shall appear that a majority of the legal votes cast at said elec- tion be in favor of the 'Constitution with no slavery,' then the article providing for slavery shall be stricken from this constitution by the' president of this convention, and slavery shall no longer exist in the State of Kansas, except that the right of property in slaves now in this Terri- tory shall in no manner be interfered with." It should be noted that Vol. II-22
930
KANSAS AND KANSANS
the clause providing for the return of fugitive slaves and the clause excluding free negroes from the state were not "in the article providing for slavery." Moreover, the constitution was not to be amended until "after the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty four."
Under the rule provided by the Lecompton convention, there was no legal method of voting against the entire constitution, therefore the free- state party refused to vote at the election on December 21, 1857. At this election, 6,226 votes were cast for the constitution with slavery, and 569 for the constitution without slavery. Of those for slavery, it is now known that 2,720 were fraudulent. This leaves but 3,506 legal votes for this constitution with its slavery provisions.
Meanwhile, Governor Walker went to Washington to protest to the President against the action of the convention in refusing to submit the whole constitution to the people for a fair vote. He now found the President opposed to him, and hence he resigned. The significant fact may here be noted that every governor had come out to Kansas rather inclined to favor the pro-slavery party, but every one of them had been driven to oppose the slave element after coming into contact with the actual conditions in the territory.
After Governor Walker left the territory, Secretary Stanton called a special session of the newly elected legislature, in which, it will be remembered, the free-state party had a clear and rightful majority. This legislature now called a special election for January 4, 1858, at which the Lecompton constitution was to be submitted to the people for a free vote for or against the whole document. At this election, the pro- slavery party, in turn, refrained from voting. There were 10,226 votes cast against the constitution, and 162 in its favor. In other words, there had now been 3,506 legal votes cast for this constitution with slavery, and 10,226 against the whole constitution. Evidently the people of Kansas did not want this constitution. In the face of all this, on February 2nd President Buchanan sent this constitution to Congress with the recommendation that Kansas be admitted to statehood under it.
Concerning the whole Lecompton movement, the historian Rhodes says: "It was a shallow and wicked performance, worthy perhaps of a border-ruffian convention, representing only 2,200 voters; but it is astounding when we know there is reason to believe that the plan ema- nated from Southern politicians of high position at Washington."
These Southern politicians, together with President Buchanan, seem originally to have been willing that the whole constitution to be framed in Kansas should be fairly submitted to the voters of that territory. But when they learned that by the refusal of the free-state men to take part in the election, a pro-slavery constitutional convention had been elected these wiley Southern politicians evolved the scheme of having this convention not only make but also promulgate the consti- tution for the new state without submitting it to any popular vote, and they seem to have won the President over to their scheme body and soul. When these pro-slavery delegates, at this rump convention spoke for "a community which was overwhelmingly in favor of a free state
931
KANSAS AND KANSANS
. . they were obedient to the instructions which had been brought to them from Washington." Buchanan probably did not originate this scheme, but rather fell a victim of the schemers. Lewis Cass, Buchanan's secretary of state, did not approve the Lecompton scheme, but he did not come out openly and oppose it.
In contrast to both Buchanan and Cass, we have the heroic and. positive stand of Stephen A. Douglas, who was a recognized leader of the strong Democratic party which was then in power at Washington. Well does the historian Rhodes say of him that no Democrat but one of rare courage and indomitable energy would have set himself in opposition to this party at this time. As soon as Douglas learned of the Lecompton scheme he immediately let it be known that he would definitely oppose the move. He hastened to Washington, where in a stormy scene he definitely broke with the President, though of his own political party. On December 9th, after the President had sent his message to Congress, suggesting the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution, Senator Douglas made a definite and outstanding speech against this movement. In this speech he said that the Lecompton convention had declared "All men in favor of the constitution may vote for it-all men against it shall not vote at all. Why not let them vote against it?" he continued, "I have asked a very large number of the gentlemen who framed the constitution, quite a number of delegates, and a still larger number of persons who are their friends, and I have received the same answer from every one of them. They say if they allowed a negative vote, the constitution would have been voted down by an over- whelming majority, and hence the fellows shall not be allowed to vote at all." Again he declared: "If Kansas wants a slave-State constitu- tion, she has a right to it; if she wants a free-State constitution, she has a right to it. It is none of my business which way the slavery clause is decided. I care not whether it is voted down or voted up." He did, however, insist most decidedly that the people's wish should be freely and fairly applied in Kansas. He declared the Lecompton scheme to be "a trick, a fraud upon the rights of the people." The break between Douglas and the President was complete.
On the 2nd of February President Buchanan sent to Congress the Lecompton constitution with the positive recommendation that Kansas be admitted under that organic act. The historian Rhodes keenly sum- marizes the message in these words: "It is determined by the slavery propaganda that Kansas shall be a slave State. There is now one more free than slave State in the union, and Kansas is needed to restore the equilibrium. To make it a slave State by fair means is impossible. We have now a chance to make it one under the color of law, and this opportunity we are going to use to the best of our ability." The struggle between the President and Douglas, between the administration forces who were trying to force the Lecompton constitution on Kansas, and the anti-slavery men who were trying to defeat this fraudulent scheme, now engrossed the attention of both houses of Congress. In the debate on the bill, "the argument on one side was bare technicality, and on
932
KANSAS AND KANSANS
the other, justice." The excitement over this question at Washington was very great. The political atmosphere was highly charged. Con- gressmen even eame to blows over the issue. The administration used every possible means to defeat Douglas and seeure the admission of Kansas under this constitution.
The United States Senate, on the 23rd of March, by a vote of 33 to 25, passed a bill to admit Kansas under the Lecompton constitution. The House, on the other hand, on April 1st, by a vote of 120 to 112, provided that the constitution should be submitted onee more to the people of Kansas for a popular vote; if accepted, that Kansas should be admitted accordingly; but if rejected, that a new territorial conven- tion should be called to frame another constitution. The two houses were in a deadlock. On request of the Senate, a conference committee was appointed. On April 23rd, this committee, through its chairman, William H. English, reported a new bill, known as the English bill.
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.