USA > Kentucky > History of Kentucky, Volume II > Part 40
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 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90
65 Kentucky Yeoman, Oct. 8, 1846.
66 Oct. 15, 1846.
835
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
the 'omnibus bill,' divorces some twenty-six persons all at a dash. There are perhaps seventy couples divorced. There are also twenty-three sep- arate acts changing the names of persons, and some of them changing about a dozen at a time. If this State of things is allowed to progress, people will hardly know in a few years their nearest acquaintances by name, or who is or is not married." 67
There were a considerable number of strong conservatives in both parties, but principally whigs, who were opposed to most of these reforms (and therefore against the convention), but who feared to come out strongly against the spirit of the times. They concealed their opposition mostly in silence or in such warnings against hasty action and change as greet all reforms. Some called attention to the fact that the constitu- tion had been made by their venerable forefathers and that it should not be tampered with out of respect to their memory and their ability.68
In the contest for the election of delegates, caused partly by the fear of the abolitionists and emancipationists, party lines at times were for- gotten. Much real thinking was done by the people generally, and as a result in a number of places candidates were elected because of their known views on reforms rather than of the fact that they were whigs or democrats. The Kentucky Yeoman characterized the campaign and election thus: "Everything seems to have been thrown into confusion, and we find democrats returned from the hitherto strongest whig coun- ties, and whigs from old, steadfast democratic counties. It is evident to us that there must be a new formation of parties in this State; those in favor of liberal Constitutional reforms constituting one party, and the conservatives and aristocracy the other." 69
As heretofore noted the democrats won a majority of the delegates and organized the convention with James Guthrie as president. The con- vention had many able men in it, and in many respects was a remarkable body.70 But George D. Prentice's Louisville Journal saw in it a strange mixture : "It contained men remarkable for their information, and others remarkable for the want of it. It contained some wonderful for their en- dowments by nature and their acquisitions by study ; and others, about whom the only wonderful fact was that they had ever got into such a body at all. There were men of much thought who never spoke; and not a few who seldom thoughit, but who seemed quite willing to speak all the time. There were old men of talent, much experience and great practi- cal wisdom in the business of legislation. There were scores of men of middle age, of fine intellect, good information, and excellent sense ; and there were three or four at least of young men, of more than ordinary promise, who in this convention first began to emerge into distinction. But after all, the body was perhaps as remarkable for those who were not as for those [who] were in it. Clay and Crittenden refused to be candidates, Robertson [Robert J.] Breckinridge, Morehead, and T. F. Marshall were candidates, and defeated. Is it not a remarkable thing that a convention should have assembled in Kentucky in which none of these six greatly distinguished citizens held seats?" 71 Deliberations began on October 1 (1849) and continued until December 21st.
Various changes were made in the new constitution looking toward a closer control of the government by the people, and carrying out in gen- eral the reforms agitated before the convention met. With regard to the legislative department, the House in its entirety was made elective every
67 Kentucky Yeoman, March 10, 1848. For the reforms desired see Niles' Reg- ister, Vol. 75, pp. 122, 256; Kentucky Yeoman, Feb. 18, 1848; March 4, 1847; Aug. 9, 1849.
68 Kentucky Yeoman, Feb. 25, 1847.
69 Ibid., Aug. 9, 1849.
70 Kentucky Yeoman, Oct. 4, 1849.
71 Quoted in Lexington Observer and Reporter, Jan. 9, 1850.
836
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
two years, while one half of the senate should be replaced biennially. By meeting certain population requirements, cities were given representa- tion in both houses, and for purposes of election a census was ordered every eight years. Districts were provided for in the election of both senators and representatives, with the provision that no county should be divided, but in the case of representation in the House when a county did not contain the required number of voters for a representative it might be joined to other counties to secure the required number. Certain of the old powers of the Legislature which had been abused in the past were taken away. It would no longer grant divorces nor change the names of people nor engage in certain other special legislation. The sinking fund was protected from diminution by the Legislature, by pro- viding that the whole resources of this fund, from year to year, should be sacredly set apart and applied to the payment of the interest and principal of the state debt, and to no other use or purpose, until the whole debt of the state should be fully paid and satisfied. To further guard its credit the state was put in a remarkably strong financial position. Now the right of the general assembly to contract debts was limited to $500,000 except "to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or, if hostili- ties are threatened, provide for the public defense." With certain limi- tations, all debts contracted had to be provided with taxing arrange- ments which would meet the interest payments each year and discharge the debt within thirty years, and such act borrowing money had to be submitted to a popular vote and receive "a majority of all the votes cast for or against it." All appropriations of money amounting to more than $100 had to receive a majority in both houses of all elected members and their names were required to be entered on the records. It was further provided that all bills should relate to one subject only and that that should be stated in the title. Sessions were limited to sixty days unless a two-thirds majority of both houses should direct otherwise.
The governor was elected for a term of four years and made in- capable of succeeding himself. The obscurities of the gubernatorial succession in the old constitution were cleared up by specifically provid- ing that in case of vacancy in the office before two years of the term shall have expired, a new election should be called by the lieutenant governor or such other officer filling the position.
One of the most far-reaching changes concerned the judiciary. All judges were hereafter to be elected by the people and serve a fixed term- the judges of the Court of Appeals, eight years, judges of the circuit courts, six years, and the county court judges, four years. A great host of officers heretofore appointive were now made elective, such as the county attorney, clerk, surveyor, coroner, and jailer. As if democracy had not permeated far enough, this further provision was made: "The general assembly may provide for the election or appointment, for a term not exceeding four years, of such other county or district ministerial and executive officers as shall, from time to time, be necessary and proper." The wisdom of this change has long been doubted by many, but Kentucky was here only tardily following the lead of the great major- ity of the other states.
A number of other important reforms and changes were made. Duel- ling had been frowned upon at least twice, but the death blow was not given, as the politicians and official class were the chief users of this method of settling disputes. All officials and members of the General Assembly were required to take this oath: ** * * I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present constitution I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel, with deadly weapons, within this State, nor out of it, with a citizen of this State, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel, with deadly weapons, with a
837
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
citizen of this State, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, or aided or assisted any person thus offending : So help me God." A sec- tion of the constitution provided that any person fighting a duel or being implicated in various specified ways should forfeit the right to hold office in the commonwealth and be subject to such punishment as the General Assembly might prescribe. But it was immediately added that the gover- nor could pardon such person after five years and restore him to his for- mer position in every respect. The period of election was now reduced to one day, and the ballot was discarded for the viva voce method. As heretofore noted, the educational fund was secured against future mis- use, and slavery was further entrenched. The method of amendment was left without material change.72 Remembering the length to which the attacks on ancient rights and personal property had been carried in the past, the convention took occasion to declare in the bill of rights "That absolute, arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority." 73
The convention summed up its work thus, "We have boldly, but we trust not incautiously, removed those barriers which our ancestors deemed necessary to impose on the direct exercise of popular sovereignty, and this we have done without apprehension, as we felt an abiding confidence in the wisdom and moderation with which these great powers would be exercised by the freemen of Kentucky." 74 But the more conservative critic declared, "The fundamental principle of the new constitution is to throw every thing pellmell into the ballot box, even down to the election of militia officers, constables, and jailers." 75
The new constitution was referred to a popular vote in May, 1850. A surprisingly strong opposition immediately sprang up against its adop- tion. As this was largely a democratic constitution, the movement for revision having been pushed by the democrats and the convention having been controlled by them, the whig leaders came out boldly in opposition to it. They were actuated in part by partisan reasons, but they were also impelled by a strong belief that it was not for the best interests of the people. Former Chief Justice Robertson attacked it as not carrying out the desires of the people expressed before the convention met. No easier method for amendment had been made, and he was thoroughly convinced the independence and efficiency of the judiciary had been destroyed by making it elective. He charged that the new instrument made the people no longer masters of their own money; and he believed a big mistake had been made by stripping the governor of his power of appointment.76 Other whigs who used their power and influence against the adoption of the new constitution were Garret Davis, Lieutenant Governor John L. Helm, and Thomas F. Marshall. They attacked the instrument in numer- ous places, and sought to build up organizations to defeat it in the May election.77 These leaders drew up a long address to the people condemn-
72 Shaler, Kentucky, 215, 216 falls into this error : "Moreover, the provisions for changing the constitution, before difficult, were now made so complicated that it has been found practically impossible to secure any further changes of that instru- ment, despite the considerable need that now exists for substantial changes." Change was, indeed, difficult down until 1890 when another constitutional convention was finally called, but the difficulty was not due to a change in the methods of 1799. The wording is virtually identical in the constitutions of 1799 and 1850.
73 The text of this constitution may be found in Thorpe, Federal and State Con- stitutions, III, 1292-1315. Also see Kentucky Statesmen, April 17, 1850; Dembitz, Kentucky Jurisprudence, 10; Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1899, I, 139-141 ; 1910, p. 342.
74 New Constitution of the State of Kentucky (pamphlet), 13.
75 Article in Louisville Journal quoted in Lexington Observer Reporter, Feb. 2, 1850.
76 Robertson, Scrap Book, 339-345.
17 Kentucky Statesman, May 11, et seq., 1850; Lexington Observer and Reporter, Jan. 23, 1850.
838
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
ing the new constitution and spread this address in 5,000 copies over the state. Eight resolutions were adopted, one of which declared that "the people will be insecure in all their most valued rights against the over- bearing power of numbers, with no check but a Judiciary which may be expected to be subservient to that power which it ought to resist." 78 They took on the name of "Friends of Constitutional Liberty" and sought to found branches in all the counties throughout the state. Such societies were set up at Lexington, Frankfort and other places.79
But such a fight was diametrically opposed to the spirit of the times and it was destined to fail miserably. In a total vote of 91,955, the new constitution was given a majority of 51,351. Kentucky was democratic in actuality as well as in feeling now, and this constitution had much to do with making the state democratic in politics.
While Kentucky was busy making herself a new constitution, national problems of great concern were being debated before Congress and throughout the country. Of these happenings she was fully aware. The Mexican war had left as a legacy a problem that threatened to plunge the country into a civil war ten years before it actually came. Even before the war was over, the question had been raised as to the status of slavery in the new territory, which the United States had conquered and would secure through the treaty of peace. Scarcely had peace been declared when gold was discovered in California, and a mad rush from every corner of the globe set in which in a year dumped there a population so numerous as to set up a state government and demand admission into the union as a free state. This was bitterly opposed by the South. Soon the atmosphere of Washington was surcharged with acrimonious debate on the California problem, the abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia, fugitive slave laws and other heated questions, rending the few shreds of friendship still remaining between the two sections. Bitter charges of discrimination were hurled at the North, and threats of disunion became frequent.
Although considering herself part and parcel of the South, Kentucky had ingrained into her very being feelings for the union too strong to be lightly broken. Many times heretofore had she expressed that love, and again now under the leadership of Gov. John J. Crittenden did she re- affirm it. Crittenden said in 1848:
"We can have no better security for our rights than that Union and the kindred feelings that unite us with all the members of the Confed- eracy. If these sentiments ever cease to prevail, I trust that Kentucky will be the last spot, from which they will be banished. Errors and abuses may occasionally arise in the administration of the general gov- ernment,-so they may in the administration of all governments- and we must rely upon public opinion, the basis of all republican gov- ernment, for their correction. The dissolution of the Union can never be regarded-ought never to be regarded-as a remedy, but as the consum- mation of the greatest evil that can befall us.
"Kentucky devoted to the Union, will look to it with filial confidence, and, to the utmost of her might, will maintain and defend it. We let no mediations or calculations on any sectional or other confederacy beguile us to the point of weakening our attachment to the Union. Our relations and our attachments are with and to all the States; and we are unwilling to impair them by any entangling engagements with a part." 80
Talk of secession in the south became more persistent, as Congress debated but found no remedies. A wide-spread feeling was growing up
78 Lexington Observer and Reporter, Feb. 20, 27, 1850.
79 Robertson, Scrap Book, 338; Lexington Observer and Reporter, Feb. 20, 1850. 80 Coleman, Life of John J. Crittenden, I, 333. Message to the Legislature, De- cember 30, 1848.
839
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
that the Union was in danger of dissolution. But Kentucky refused to be carried away in the current of complaint and discontent. Again Governor Crittenden expressed his state's strong unionism. Kentucky had grown strong and great in the Union, she was only a part of the immense Mis- sissippi River Valley, an economic unit that must not be severed. Dis- union would be ruinous. "A moment's reflection," he declared, "will show the ruinous consequences of disunion to the commerce of Ken- tucky and the other Western States. The most obvious considerations of interest combine, therefore, with all that are nobler and more generous, to make the Union not only an object of attachment, but of necessity to us. Kentucky is not insensible to the causes which have produced so much sensibility and irritation with her brethren of the Southern States, nor is she without her sympathies with them. But she does not permit herself to harbor one thought against the Union. She deprecates disunion as the greatest calamity; she can see NO REMEDY in it,-none, cer- tainly, for any grievance as yet complained of or to be apprehended. Kentucky will stand by and abide by the Union to the last, and she will hope that the same kind Providence that enabled our fathers to make it, will enable us to preserve it." 81
Crittenden was not, speaking his sentiment alone; the great body of Kentuckians felt the same way. The editor of the Lexington Observer and Reporter said of this unionism: "The views of the Governor upon this subject are so just in themselves, so expressive of the feelings and sentiments of every patriotic heart, and withal so beautifully and elo- quently expressed, that they cannot fail to find a response in the breast of every Kentuckian. Gov. Crittenden is right; there is no mistaking the position of Kentucky in reference to this deeply interesting and mo- mentous question, and we trust the Legislature will without delay respond to the patriotic sentiments of the Message." 82 The same pervading love for the Union was carved into the Washington monument, then in the process of being erected, when Kentucky in 1850 presented a block of her native marble bearing this inscription, "Under the auspices of Heaven and the precepts of Washington, Kentucky will be the last to give up the Union." 83 When the nine Southern States, goaded on by Northern aggression, met in the Nashville Convention in 1850, Kentucky was not to be found among the states represented. A resolution to send representatives was laid on the table in the Senate by a proportional ma- jority of three to one. Kentucky would not countenance disunion by even considering its possibility.84
But in the meantime, before the Nashville Convention had met, de- termined effort was being made to bring about a settlement of the dis- turbing questions. Clay, who had been virtually forced into the Senate again against his will, was hard at work curbing the forces, North and South, working for disunion. He offered a compromise consisting of eight articles, and dealing with the questions under discussion, which were long debated, but which finally went through Congress in one form or another-and all taken together came to be known as the "Compromise of 1850," the last triumph of the "Great Pacificator." Clay and his state, and the country as a whole, felt that if the compromise should fail, only disunion and war remained. Webster reached the crowning glory of his life in his celebrated Seventh of March speech-the only speech in Ameri- can history known by the date of its delivery. Clay declared, "If my own State should raise the standard of disunion
81 Ibid., 351. Message to Legislature, December 31, 1849.
82 Jan. 2, 1850.
83 Acts of Kentucky, 1849, p. 716. Dated January 24, 1850.
84 There were certain unofficial meetings in the state that sent delegates, but Ken- tucky was not considered as represented. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, VIII, 17.
840
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
I would go against her; I would go against Kentucky * * * much as I love her." The Compromise succeeded, and Clay went back to Ken- tucky to receive the acclaim of democrats and whigs alike. In accepting an invitation to attend a barbecue to him and the other Kentucky con- gressmen, he said, "During the arduous struggle in Congress, it was a source of great satisfaction and encouragement to me to learn from Ken- tucky that my fellow citizens in this State, without distinction of party, were almost unanimous in favor of those measures, so long discussed, which were designed to reconcile Sectional differences, and preserve the Union free from all danger. * * My Democratic fellow Citizens have met and welcomed me with a cordiality and warmth not surpassed
HENRY CLAY MONUMENT IN CEMETERY AT LEXINGTON
by the whigs, and both parties have united in gratifying demonstrations of their attachment and confidence." 85
Clay's first impression of the reception of the compromise in Ken- tucky was correct. Both parties considered the perplexing questions of the day settled and the Union saved. The whigs were naturally in favor of the settlement both from principle and from the fact that their great leader had brought it about. The democrats, though perforce of a more sceptical attitude than the whigs, were not far behind in their protesta- tions of loyalty to the Union and the compromise. Governor Powell, a democrat, said, "The dark and lowering clouds that recently threatened the existence of the union of the states of this glorious confederacy are
85 Clay's address, October 10, 1850 in J. O. Harrison MSS. Collection, owned by Mr. Harrison Simrall of Lexington.
841
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
happily passing away. Kentucky is the firm and devoted friend of the union ; and is for maintaining inviolate and carrying out, in strictness and in truth, in letter and in spirit, the compromise measures passed by the last Congress of the United States." 86 The democrats in their state convention in January, 1851, declared, "That Kentucky, until her equal- ity, her rights, and her honor are so outraged that she cannot preserve them by remaining within the Union, will stand by it as it is, and by the President in executing any law passed in accordance with the constitution of the United States." 87
Although the "Great Commoner" was now old and feeble; he deter- mined to return to Washington to resume his duties in the Senate. But his strength was gone, and in December, 1851, he resigned his seat to take effect in September, 1852. But before that date arrived, he died in the service of his country, as he had really wished. His body was brought back to Lexington through an almost continuous throng of mourning Americans, and buried in the Lexington Cemetery, where 30,000 people participated in the impressive ceremonies. Five years later the corner stone of the monument that now marks his tomb, was laid in the presence of 40,000 people from many parts of the country-he was not a Kentuckian, he was an American.
86 Message to the Legislature, November 4, 1851 in Kentucky Yeoman, Nov. 7, 1851.
87 Ibid , Jan. 16, 1851.
Vol. 11-18
CHAPTER LX
BREAKING THE BONDS OF THE UNION
The Compromise of 1850 and the adoption of the new constitution in the same year had important results in the political affairs of the state. Both of them immediately after their accomplishment appeared as strong recommendations for the respective parties that claimed credit for them. The first gauge of their effect was the campaign and election of 1851. The democrats nominated Lazarus W. Powell for governor; the whigs chose Archibald Dixon. The campaign immediately developed much in- terest and hot discussion. For the first time, the voters were now called upon to elect a number of officers, staggering in comparison to the few they had been allowed to vote for heretofore. All the judges and a host of minor officers such as county attorneys, clerks, sheriffs, coroners, and jailers were elected in May, with the result that a surprisingly small amount of party rivalry entered into the election. In these local cam- paigns, personal knowledge of the candidate played a bigger part than party designations.1 But all of the old time party vigor appeared as the gubernatorial election drew near. The democrats assumed the offensive with such force that it marked the beginning of the end of the whig party.
The new constitution, which was unquestionably pleasing to the great majority of the people, was held up as the work of the democrats. It ushered in a new era of real democracy, which the people were reminded time and again was made possible by the democrats. The democrats in their convention in Frankfort in January (1851) declared "That the call of the Convention was brought about and the New Constitution adopted" to secure the people against the old whig abuses and extrava- gances, and "that they are chiefly indebted to the democratic party for the agitation and final consummation of the reforms secured by it
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.