USA > Kentucky > History of Kentucky, Volume II > Part 64
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
In the campaign of 1887 were two other parties, small but persistently magnifying some particular policy or condition in life. Temperance or prohibition had been a subject that had played a considerable part in the thoughts of people before the Civil war, and directly after the whig party had dissolved in the '50s, for a time it seemed as if the temperance party would develop into some political strength. Every such thought was soon buried in war politics, and not until about 1880 did the pro- hibition party raise its head in Kentucky. A convention was held on February 15 of this year at Lexington, when it was resolved that can- didates should be run for office. Within a year it had gained much strength, and in a meeting in Louisville on October 14, 1881, both the democrats and the republicans were denounced as allies of the liquor in- terests, and certain party tenets were announced. Besides the cardinal principle of opposition to the liquor business, the right of women to vote was demanded, with reference especially to the question of liquor. In 1887 a state ticket was announced, with F. T. Fox for governor. Con- stitutional amendments, both state and national, were called for to put a stop to the liquor traffic: hiring out convicts was denounced ; a law disfranchising anyone who should buy or sell a vote was demanded, and an investigation every ten years of all state offices was advocated. The union labor party entered this campaign, with A. H. Cardin for gov- ernor.71
69 Acts of Kentucky, 1914, PP. 506-508.
70 For the various points see American Annual Cyclopacdia, 1879, PP. 541, 542; 1882, p. 452; 1883, p. 461; 1887, p. 411.
71 American Annual Cyclopacdia, 1880, P. 450; 1881, p. 469; 1887, p. 411.
GEN. S. B. BUCKNER
1004
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
It was during Governor Buckner's term that the fourth constitution was made. The constitution of 1850 had been framed under conditions so different from those of 1890 as to constitute entirely another age. The Civil war, with all of its tremendous consequences, had come and gone, and a new era of social and economic development was now at hand, but the same ante-bellum instrument of government was being haltingly used by a modern state. Besides being grossly out of date, it positively conflicted with the Federal Constitution and with certain state laws in pursuance thereof. Slavery in all of its vigor was protected, despite the fact that that institution had been dead for a quarter of a century. Kentuckians were not oblivious to these incongruities ; scarcely had the war ended when a movement for a constitutional convention be- gan to be agitated. But the method of amendment had been made so nearly impossible that it was only through a thoroughly aroused demand throughout the whole state that there could be any hope of success. Only after a majority of all voters should in two successive elections stand for a constitutional convention could one be called-and the Leg- islature, itself, could refuse to put the vote, if it so desired. In 1873 the Legislature took up the matter of submitting the question to the people, but little resulted outside of the appointment of a joint committee of investigation. However, the next year the Legislature passed a law submitting the convention question to the people at the next election. When the returns were in, it was found that only a small minority had signified their desire for a convention. From now on until success was had, the great problem before the leaders of the state was to so suffi- ciently arouse the people as to have them express their views. The greatest handicap was the lethargy of the masses, rather than any pro- nounced opposition. In each succeeding election the question was voted upon, but little progress seemed to be made. In 1884 only 73,704 out of a total of 169,173 voted for a convention.72
The case seemed almost hopeless. Both parties regularly favored a convention in their various platforms and addresses to the people. In 1875 the republicans demanded constitutional reform in order that the people might be brought into a full control of their government "and that the stigma placed by the present constitution on all the free colored citizens of the state may be removed." 73 Various methods were adopted to wring from the voter an expression on the question. Clerks at the polls were instructed by law to ask every voter specifically to register his vote on this point. It was even advocated by some that this method of amending the constitution be ignored and, carrying out the idea of a peaceful revolution, a "sovereign convention" be called. This doctrine, besides being supported by the principle of the inherent right of revolu- tion, had some basis in the constitution in the rather all-inclusive article four of the Bill of Rights: "That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness, security, and the protection of prop- erty. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an in- alienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their govern- ment, in such manner as they may think proper." 74
Finally, in 1887, after almost continuous efforts since 1873, a popular majority was secured. In the election of this year 162,557 voted for a constitutional convention ; 49,795 voted against it, and 65,956 did not vote at all. The victory was only half won, as two successive majorities
72 Acts of Kentucky, 1873, P. 74; 1881, I, 141, etc .; American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1873, P. 401; 1874, P. 440; 1883, p. 461, etc.
73 Ibid., 1875, p. 417; 1879, p. 541.
74 Thorpe, American Charters, Constitutions, and Organic Laws, III, 1312. Also see American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1878, p. 468; 1879, P. 573; 1881, P. 468; 1887, p. 4II.
1005
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
were necessary. Victory was complete two years later, when a second majority was given. The Legislature now called for an election of del- egates to the convention to meet soon thereafter in Frankfort. As in 1850, so now, the democrats secured control, and on September 8, 1890, the organization was effected. Governor Buckner called the meeting to order, and, as a man with a name to conjure with was found among the delegates, George Washington was unhesitatingly made temporary chairman. Cassius M. Clay, Jr., was then made permanent chairman. The old constitution was thoroughly made over and a new instrument almost twice as long was produced. Outgrown provisions, such as the article on slavery, were omitted and much new material was added to cover new conditions. Numerous sections were added relative to munic- ipalities, revenue and taxation, education, corporations and railroads and commerce. The power of the Legislature to pass special legislation was curtailed in twenty-nine separate classes of subjects, lotteries were made illegal, and a "secret official ballot" furnished by the state should be used in voting. The sessions of the Legislature were prohibited from extend- ing over more than sixty days, except in the case of the Senate when acting as a court of impeachment. Under the old constitution sessions might not extend beyond sixty days, except by a two-thirds vote. This had resulted in no limitation at all, as the required majority could always be had when desired, and sessions were known to extend through as long a period as 149 days. An easier method of changing the constitution was adopted. Not more than two amendments might be added at one time by the Legislature, through a three-fifths vote, submitting them to a popular vote, in which only one submission and a simple majority of votes cast was necessary. For calling a convention, a majority vote of all mem- bers in two consecutive legislatures and the submission of the question to a popular vote, in which the majority for the convention must be at least one-fourth of all qualified voters, was the plan provided.75
The work of the convention did not meet with instant approval, even among the democrats, who had been in control. Its chief fault lay in the fact that its members tried to legislate for all time. In the party convention in May, 1891, no mention was made of the new constitution. However, the opposition soon died out, and in the following election it was adopted by 213,950 to 74,446. But even yet the troubles were not over. The convention reassembled in September, after the constitution had been adopted by the above popular vote, and proceeded to make certain changes. It was claimed by the convention that no material changes had been made, that the language had been merely smoothed out and certain grammatical errors corrected. But this explanation was not satisfactory to all; two suits were speedily begun, one against the public printer to restrain him from publishing the new constitution and the other against the secretary of state to prevent him from preserving it as the true constitution, and it was furthermore asked that this docu- ment be pronounced spurious and invalid. The trouble finally reached the Court of Appeals, and Chief Justice Holt said in his decision, "If through error of opinion the convention exceeded its power and the peo- ple are dissatisfied, they have ample remedy without the judiciary being asked to overstep the proper limits of its power. The instrument pro- vides for amendment and change. If a wrong has been done, it can. and the proper way in which it should, be remedied is by the people act- ing as a body politic. A new constitution has been formed and promul- gated according to the forms of law. Great interests have already arisen
75 A copy may be found in Thorpe, American Charters, Constitutions, and Or- ganic Laws, III, 1316-1358, and in E. S. Kinkead, A History of Kentucky (New York, 1919), 227-271. See also American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1887, p. 412; 1888, p. 462; 1889, p. 487; 1890, p. 474; 1891, pp. 405-407.
1006
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
under it; important rights exist by virtue of it ; persons have been con- victed of the highest crimes known to law according to its provisions ; the political power of the Government has in many ways recognized it ; and under such circumstances it is our duty to treat and regard it as a valid constitution, and now the organic law of our commonwealth." 76
The perennial question of the final and permanent seat of the gov- ernment was taken up in 1892 by the appointment of a joint committee To investigate and present the advantage of at least four cities, one of which should be Frankfort. Frankfort was finally made the seat of government beyond further doubt, when a handsome and commodious capitol building, perhaps excelled by none in the Union, was erected.77
In 1891 the Democrats nominated John Young Brown for governor, and the republicans named A. T. Wood. The new constitution received considerable attention in the campaign, with the republicans taking a very prominent stand in its favor. Wood said: "We declare that we recommend the adoption of the new constitution because it blots from our laws all provisions that authorize human slavery, secures a secret ballot, and provides against frauds and corruption in elections; subjects to regulation by law all public corporations, prohibits the abuse of spe- cial legislation, abolishes lotteries, enlarges and protects the common- school fund, increases the opportunities of popular education, makes more equal the burdens of taxation, better protects the agricultural and laboring interests, and makes provision for its own ready amendment by the people." 78 The most significant thing about this campaign and election was, perhaps, the part played by the populists. Nationally they were a party recently grown up as a protest of the farmers of the West and the South against hard times, with more money as one of their cardinal principles, and with the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1 as a potent remedy. The Kentucky populists nominated Erwin for governor. The election resulted in the choice of Brown, but Erwin polled the surprising vote of 25.631. By 1893 the nation was in the throes of a withering panic and, regardless of its causes, the democrats, who held the Presidency at this time under Cleveland, were forced to bear the blame. The Kentucky democrats were given their proper share of the unpopularity, as was so clearly shown in the congressional election of 1894, when they succeeded in carrying only six out of the eleven dis- tricts. The republicans, besides carrying five districts, elected a justice to the Court of Appeals.79
Political conditions were rapidly approaching a state of flux, out of which exact party crystallizations could not yet be predicted. The money question, which a surprisingly few really understood, was sweep- ing the country. The free coinage of silver and the adoption of bi-metal- lism were heralded throughout the country as a cure for all ills the peo- ple were suffering, and the doctrine was embraced by hundreds of thou- sands who did not understand and could not. Both democrats and republicans alike were attracted, with a more goodly number of the former succumbing. The gubernatorial campaign of 1895 was largely concerned with this issue. With the democrats hopelessly divided among themselves. the fight began for the nomination of a candidate for gov- ernor. P. W. Hardin was the outstanding leader of the free silver wing, while Cassius M. Clay sought to hold the party together more by maintaining that the money question was not for the state to deal with or worry about, than by positively arguing for the single gold standard. The pre-convention campaign was hotly fought, with John G. Carlisle,
76 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1892, p. 373.
77 Acts of Kentucky, 1891, 1892, 1893.
78 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1891, p. 408.
79 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1894, P. 396.
1007
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
the Secretary of the Treasury in Cleveland's Cabinet, visiting the state and making a number of speeches against free silver. The fight in- creased in intensity as the convention met in Louisville to make the state nominations. But hard times and the lure of free silver had won the day ; Hardin, the free silver candidate, was nominated. The Republicans had previously held their convention and had nominated their staunch- est and most able representative, William O. Bradley, on a single gold standard platform. The campaign was spirited and hard-fought, with many joint debates taking place. The gold standard democrats were greatly displeased with their candidate, and some of them demanded his withdrawal. As the campaign progressed it was evident that the demo- crats were hopelessly divided, and it should have occasioned no surprise, when the voting was over, that Bradley was elected by almost a 10,000 majority over Hardin. The populist candidate, Pettit, received about 17,000 votes. Many democrats had deserted their party, some tempo- rarily, others permanently.80
Now for the first time in the history of the state the republicans were in control of the executive power. Would they be able to succeed where they had so often charged the democrats with failure? The answer was difficult, for, like almost every National Administration since the Civil war, they did not control all branches of the government. In the Legislature the republicans held a majority in the House, but the democrats controlled the Senate. The stage was now set for four years of bickering and strenuous conflict between the two parties. During the first session of the Legislature under Bradley, fewer than forty bills became laws, and only nine resolutions were passed. Deadlocks were frequent not only over desired legislation, but especially on the election of certain officials. For a month or more there was a contest over the choice of a librarian, but finally the democratic candidate won out. The most prolonged and aggravated struggle was precipitated when the at- tempt was made to elect a United States senator. The free silver question was added to party rivalry, in a Legislature which in a joint session held the parties evenly divided.81 Parrying for advantage immediately began. The republican House appointed a committee of three repub- licans and two democrats to investigate the credentials of its members ; the democratic Senate made a counter-move by appointing a committee of five democrats to examine into the credentials of the Senators, with a silent threat to unseat as many republican senators as the House should unseat democratic representatives. Members of both houses were un- seated, and much confusion arose which threatened to develop into armed conflict. Against the will of fourteen democrats, J. C. S. Blackburn, a free silver supporter, was centered upon by the democratic caucus, while the republicans attempted to elect Dr. W. G. Hunter. On March 17 the session expired by constitutional limitation, in confusion and without an election having been made.82 Thereupon Governor Bradley appointed A. T. Wood to serve, beginning after March 4, 1897, if the Legislature in the meantime had failed to make a choice.
In a special session called for March, 1897, the contest was renewed, with Blackburn and Hunter the candidates. Ballot after ballot was taken, but with no result except an increasing bitterness between the factions. At times Hunter came within one vote of the election and at other times he had a majority of those present. The contest was made still more bitter by the indictment of Hunter for bribery, with his consequent trial and acquittal. Finally, on the 112th ballot, William J. Deboe, a repub-
80 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1895, pp. 382, 383.
81 There were two populists, one voting with the democrats and the other with the republicans.
82 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1896, pp. 375, 376.
1008
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
lican, was elected. The democrats never united on Backburn, due to their internal dissensions over the money question.83
In the meantime the Presidential election of 1896 had taken place, in many respects the most remarkable political contest in the history of the nation. The free silver doctrine had gripped both major parties and had called into existence either for support or opposition a number of others. The National Democratic Administration was standing for the gold standard and diligently working to hold the party back of it. In the struggle preceding the national convention, Kentucky became a storm center of major interest and importance. As heretofore men- tioned, in connection with the state elections, the Kentucky democracy was strongly impregnated with free silver doctrine. Delegates were sent to the Democratic Convention in Chicago, pledged to free silver. When the party, under the new leadership of William J. Bryan, entered the camps of bi-metallism and free silver, the great bulk of Eastern demo- crats refused to remain longer with the party. They met about two months later in Indianapolis, and under the name of national democrats, put a separate ticket into the field, with John M. Palmer for the Presi- dency and Simon B. Buckner for the Vice Presidency. Out of the varying interplay of parties and party secessions, the republicans carried the nation for McKinley and won twelve of the thirteen electoral votes of Kentucky. McKinley's majority over Bryan in Kentucky was 281, and for the first time in the history of the state the republicans had defeated the democrats in a Presidential election.84
Although the democratic party was badly shaken, it had not yet developed into a minority party. Many who had temporarily deserted it on the money question, were still democrats on all other points. In the elections of 1897 the democrats elected Samuel J. Shackelford to the clerkship of the Court of Appeals by a small majority over James G. Bailey, the republican, and won more than a two to one majority in a joint session of the Legislature. The role of the republican governor now became increasingly difficult, as the democratic Legislature was able to kill his program and force much of its own through over his veto.85 But as the next gubernatorial election approached, the outlook was not bright for the democrats. Free silver was still a flaming firebrand, so much so that Senator Lindsay, a gold standard democrat, was asked by the Legislature in 1898 to resign his seat, as he no longer represented the people of Kentucky. This he promptly refused to do and challenged the statement of the Legislature. Another storm center developed about this time, which further divided the Kentucky democracy. William Goe- bel had recently become a powerful force in the democratic party and had built up a strong following, as well as persistent antagonists. In 1898, as state senator, he had succeeded in securing a new election law, generally referred to as the "Goebel Election Law." By this law the election machinery was placed in the hands of three commissioners elected by the Legislature and in county boards appointed by these com- missioners.86 This law was bitterly attacked by the republicans and was condemned by many democrats.87
83 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1897, p. 437.
84 Edward Stanwood, A History of the Presidency from 1788 to 1897 (Boston, 1898), 519-569. From 1876 down to this time, the votes of the major parties were: In 1878, Tilden, 159,696, Hayes, 97,156; in 1880, Hancock, 149,068, Garfield, 106,306; in 1884, Cleveland, 152,961, Blaine, 118,122; in 1888, Cleveland, 183,800, Harrison, 155,134; and in 1892, Cleveland, 175,461, Harrison, 135,441.
to kill his program and force much of its own through over his veto.85 85 American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1897, P. 438; 1898, p. 356. 86 Acts of Kentucky, 1898, pp. 43-57.
87 In their convention in 1899, the republicans said that this law "is viciously par- tisan, subversive of fairness and honesty in elections, hostile to the principles of free government, removes safeguards which have heretofore protected and guaranteed the right of suffrage, denies to our courts the power to protect voters in the state
1009
HISTORY OF KENTUCKY
In the democratic convention, which inet in Louisville in June, 1899, a three-cornered fight for the gubernatorial nomination developed among Goebel, P. W. Hardin, and William J. Stone. After a heated contest, Goebel was finally nominated. Goebel's enemies refused to abide by the decision and in the following August nominated John Young Brown in a convention held in Lexington, taking the name, "Honest-election Demo- cratic Party." 88 The republicans nominated William S. Taylor, and the populists and prohibitionists also put tickets into the field. The cam- paign was one of the most bitterly fought in the history of the state; and when the votes were counted it was found that Taylor had a majority.89 The democrats immediately charged Governor Bradley with intimidation of voters by the use of the militia in Louisville on election day. An attempt was made to have the votes of Jefferson County thrown out on the grounds that the governor had been guilty of "illegally using the militia and overawing and intimidating the voters:" and "because the said military was unlawful in every respect and a criminal usurpation
of power * * * and thereby the civil power was subordinated to the military power, and an overt act of a treasonable nature against the Con- stitution of the State of Kentucky was committed." 90 Other frauds, such as the use of tissue ballots, were also charged.91
Although the republicans on the face of the returns had elected the governor, the democrats carried both branches of the Legislature by con- siderable majorities.92 On December 12, the republican administration was inaugurated, but not without the protests of the democrats and soon thereafter the notice that contests would be filed.93 Immediately on the meeting of the Legislature on January 2, 1900, contests for the offices of governor and lieutenant-governor were served, giving nine counts, and committees were appointed according to law to try the contests. As the Legislature was democratic it was generally believed that it would declare Goebel elected. On January 25, between 500 and 1,000 armed men from the eastern part of the state came to Frankfort and took up quarters around the state house. Their announced purpose was to peti- tion the government for a just settlement, which, of course, meant the republicans should not be unseated. This was considered by many as
against the perpetration of fraud at elections, commits broad powers to irresponsible commissioners not chosen by or accountable to the people for their acts, and imperils the sacredness, efficiency and power of the ballot." American Annual Cyclopaedia, 1899, pp. 409, 410. A democratic paper said of it, "In all the force bills mediated by the radical in Congress during the dark days of reconstruction, there were discernible some pretense and pretext, some lingering memories of republican instincts and tra- ditions. Even in the Plebecites of Louis Napoleon there was the outer display of a just electoral process and purpose. This force bill of Kentucky gives the voters not a ray of hope. It makes no claim or show of fairness. * * In one and at * one fell swoop, Kentucky is to become the subject of a triumvirate, which is to decide who shall hold office and who shall not." Quoted in William Lindsay, "Some Conditions in Kentucky" in International Monthly, I, p. 569.
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.