USA > Louisiana > The province and the states, a history of the province of Louisiana under France and Spain, and of the territories and states of the United States formed therefrom, Vol. III > Part 3
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
Immediately after its passage in the senate, the bill was sent to III-3
·
34
THE PROVINCE, AND THE STATES.
the house, where it was retained until the 17th of March, when it came back with many amendments by that body. The house amendment to vest the legislative power in the governor and thir- teen citizens who should be called the legislative council, was lost by 6 yeas to 22 nays. Several of the house amendments were adopted; others were rejected. On March 22, the house agreed to recede from some of its amendments; but stated that it should insist on the incorporation of several others in the bill. The house asked for the appointment of a conference committee by the sen- ate to meet one they should appoint to reconcile the various differ- ences concerning the bill. In response to this request, the senate appointed Messrs. Jackson and Dayton. On March 23, the house announced that it had agreed to the bill reported by the confer- ence committee. On March 23, the senate agreed to the confer- ence bill and passed it by 15 yeas to 9 nays. The nine voting in the negative were: Messrs. Adams, Cocke, Hillhouse, Maclay, Olcott, Pickering, Plumer, Stone and Tracy, all of whom except Cocke and Stone lived north of Mason and Dixon's line.
The house received the senate bill on February 20, and having read it referred it to the committee of the whole. Mr. Leib of Pennsylvania spoke against the proposal to give the governor power to prorogue the legislative council. Mr. Gregg, of Penn- sylvania, offered objections of a similar character, and opposed the proposition to give the president power to appoint the legisla- tive council. He asked, how was the president to know of their qualifications, and favored giving that power for one year only, or until the territory could be laid off into districts and the people could have an opportunity to elect them. He therefore introduced a section, carrying his views into effect. Mr. Varnum, of Mass- achusetts declared that the bill proposed a measure such as never before had been known in the United States. He thought the people should be given power to elect the legislative council, and moved that the committee of the whole should rise and that the matter should be referred to a select committee instructed to make the required changes. Mr. Huger, of South Carolina, thought the bill should be proceeded with and passed as it was, in view of the information that lately had come from Louisiana. He said that the people of that province should be "looked upon as a cer- tain portion of people among us and treated as such," meaning the negro slaves. But this seems to have been regarded as such an extraordinary proposition that the suggestion was dropped. Mr. Elliott, of Vermont, thought that after a few defects had been remedied by amendment the bill would answer the purpose and should be passed.
35
LOUISIANA, THE TERRITORY OF ORLEANS.
Mr. Eustis, of Massachusetts, spoke at considerable length. Among other things he said: "From the knowledge of this people which I have been able to acquire, I have formed an opin- ion that authority should be constantly exercised over them with- out severity, but in such a manner as to secure the rights of the United States and the peace of the country. The government laid down in this bill is certainly a new thing in the United States ; but the people of this country differ materially from the citizens of the United States. I speak of the character of the people at the present time. When they shall be better acquainted with the principles of our government and have become desirous of partici- pating in our privileges, it will be full time to extend to them the elective franchise. Have not the house been informed from an authentic source this session that the provisions of our constitu- tion are inapplicable to them? If so, why attempt in pursuit of a vain theory to extend political institutions to them for which they are not prepared? I am one of those who believe that the prin- ciples of civil liberty cannot suddenly be ingrafted on a people accustomed to a regimen of a directly opposite hue. The approach of such a people to liberty must be gradual. I believe them at present totally unqualified to exercise it. If this opinion be erron- eous, then the principles of the bill are unfounded. If, on the contrary, this opinion is sound, it results that neither the power given to the President to appoint the members of the council, nor of the governor to prorogue them is unsafe or unnecessary." He therefore favord the adoption and tempo549953 bill.
Mr. Lyon favored the bill, because the governor was appointed by the president and could be required to prevent any improper course of the council. He favored letting the people elect the council, and opposed the policy of keeping them in a state of prac- tical slavery until they could think and behave as freemen. Mr. Lucas, of Pennsylvania, thought that the people were not prepared for a government like that of the United States, and that because many of them had shed tears when the flag of France was pulled down and that of the United States was raised in its stead, they were more devoted to other interests than to those of their new sovereignty. He thought they should be made to wait until they showed their proper appreciation of the new order of affairs. He thonghit wise the plan to give the president large power over the governor and the governor large power over the legislative council, because of the checks that thus could be placed on any improper proceedings. Ile believed that the council should be composed of
36
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
citizens of the territory, in order that they might be initiated in the new form of government. Upon their return to their con- stituents, he reasoned, they would talk of the new order of things, and thus the whole people would soon become familiar with the laws and constitution of the United States. "When this effect shall be produced it will be time and only then to give them a gov- ernment as liberal and free as that contemplated by the amend- ment."
Mr. Macon, of North Carolina, moved to strike out all of Sec- tion IV concerning the appointment of governor and legislative council and other matters. His principal objection was that the section established "a species of government unknown to the laws of the United States." He believed the form of territorial government established by the old congress would be best adapted to Louisiana. It was in force in Mississippi territory, and Louisiana should have the same. "If they are as ignorant," he asked, "as some gentlemen represent them (and of this I know nothing), will they not expect the same grade of government with the inhabitants of the Mississippi territory, with whom they will have a constant intercourse?" He favored striking out the sec- tion, and referring the matter to a select committee.
In favor of striking out Section IV, Mr. Campbell, of Tennes- see, made a long and strong speech. He said, "The principal question is, whether we shall give the inhabitants of Louisiana the right of self-government, or even the hope that they will here- after enjoy the benefits of self-government, and of those rights which there is no doubt that they conceive themselves entitled to under the treaty with France. On examining the sec- tion it will appear that it establishes a complete despotism; that it does not evince a single trait of liberty ; that it does not confer one single right to which they are entitled under the treaty; that it does not extend to them the benefits of the Federal constitution, or declare when thereafter they shall receive them. I believe it will, on investigation, be found difficult to separate liberty from the right of self-government ; and hence arises the question now to be decided, whether we shall countenance the principle of governing by despotic systems of government, or support the principle that they are entitled to be governed by laws made by themselves, and to expect that they shall in due time receive all the benefits of citi- zens of the United States under the Constitution. By the section all legislative power is vested in a Governor and thirteen counsel- lors appointed by the President. The people have no share in their choice. The members of the Council are only to aid the Gov-
37
LOUISIANA, THE TERRITORY OF ORLEANS.
ernor ; they have no right to make laws themselves; the words of the section are, "The Governor, by and with advice and consent of the said Legislative Council or a majority of them, shall have power to alter, modify or repeal the laws which may be in force at the commencement of this act.' That is, the Governor makes the laws by and with the advice of the Council. They are not to deliberate on what shall be law; but he, like some ancient poten- tates, is to suggest to them what in his opinion is proper to be law. This is the proper construction of this section, or I do not under- stand it. They are not to make the laws and submit them to him for his approbation. He makes them and asks his creatures whether they will agree or not agree to them. I hope we are not prepared to establish such a system as this. We have no evidence that the condition of the people of Louisiana is such as to disqualify them for the enjoyment of any of the bless- ings of liberty. One principle cannot be denied :
.
When power is vested in the people, they exercise it for their own benefit and to the best of their skill. They have no object in abus- ing it; for they are sure to be the first victims of its improper exercise. I ask, then, where is the danger of placing in the hands of the people the right of choosing those who are to regulate their own internal concerns? Surely, when gentlemen depict the great danger of this investiture of power, they do not consider that the very act before us, subjects all laws to the control of Congress, and that in all cases wherein Congress shall negative them, they will have no validity. Where, then, is the danger ? If the people are already hostile to the United States, it is evident that it is not the severity of despotism that will make them friendly. Not long since, this people were congratulated on their releasement from a despotic government and were invited into the arms of a government ready to extend to them all the bless- ings of self-government. Now we are about to damp all their hopes and to send forth a few creatures to lash them with despot- ism, to make all their laws. We go further. We do not even hold forth the idea that at a future day they shall make their own laws. Our language is, if, notwithstanding the despotism we extend over you, like good subjects, you patiently bear your chains, we may withdraw them and let you govern yourselves.
How does a despot govern his subjects? He tells them and makes them believe that they are ignorant and unqualified to govern themselves; considering their ignorance he tells them he does them a favor by governing them and they have nothing to do but to obey. . Let us not say, the people are too ignorant to
38
THIE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
govern themselves. No, give them an opportunity and they will acquire knowledge, at least sufficient to make a proper choice of those best qualified to superintend their concerns." He therefore favored letting the governor and judges administer the govern- ment of the territory until the people should choose their own legislature.
'The debate to strike out Section IV, was renewed on February 29. Mr. Jackson, of Virginia, opposed the treatment to be accorded the Louisianians by Section IV, and took Mr. Huger to task for his statement that the people should be treated like the slaves. He said, "Look at the ensanguined plains of St. Domingo; the oppressed there have broken their chains and resumed their long lost rights. And are the subjects of a monarchy, the inhabitants of Louisiana, more deficient in manly sentiment than the people of St. Domingo? This argument of incompetency in the people to govern themselves, is the essence of despotism; its language is, 'The people are a mob; a swinish multitude; and the Divine Goodness has pleased to send into the world kings and nobles to keep them in order.'"
Mr. Holland, of North Carolina, said that his ideas were very different from those of Mr. Jackson. He said, "The only ques- tion is, whether we shall extend to the people of Louisiana the right of free suffrage in its fullest extent and such as is enjoyed by the people of the United States. Gentlemen in favor of strik- ing out this section, seem impressed with the idea that every gen- tleman friendly to the section is in favor of an absolute des- potism-is inimical to their rights, is desirous of making the people of Louisiana slaves. They take the ground that, if we deny them this right, we deny them everything. But there is a wide difference between denying them the privilege of election and extending to them other high privileges; more, perhaps, than they are capable of enjoying. This law will extend to them the privilege of twenty-one acts of the United States, to which the freemen of the United States are subject. Is this nothing? Gentlemen say that they ought not to be subjected but to laws of their own making; but the whole form of this bill contradicts the assertion, as it principally consists in imposing laws which the people* never made or ought to participate in making. Will the gentlemen take the broad ground that people should never be governed but by laws of their own making? This is indeed the amount of the argument, and, proving too much, it proves nothing. Mr. Huger said he believed the people of St. Domingo, who had been alluded to, not qualified to support a free govern-
39
LOUISIANA, TIIE TERRITORY OF ORLEANS.
ment-not possessed of sufficient knowledge. People who never had an opportunity to obtain knowledge, connot be supposed to possess it, and no kind of knowledge was more difficult to obtain than that which qualifies men to be legislators. Can gentlemen conceive the people of Louisiana, who have just thrown off their chains, qualified to make laws? Under the late system the people had no concern in the government, and it was even criminal for them to concern themselves with it; they were set at a distance from the government, and all required from their hands was to be passive and obedient. Can it be supposed such a people made the subject of government their study, or can it be presumed they know anything about the Constitution of the United States ? Would persons thus elected be of any service to the government ? So far from being an assistance, they would be an incumbrance. Why then impose this burden upon them? The object of this bill is to extend the laws of the United States over Louisiana, not to enable the people of Louisiana to make laws. This extension, so far from being an act of despotism, will be an important privi. lege. If the laws of the United States were founded on injustice, they might have some right to complain; but we only apply to them laws by which we ourselves consent to be governed.
It is a fact that many of the most respectable characters in the country conceive the principle of self-government a mere bubble, and they will not consider themselves aggrieved if it is not extended to them. Does the history of nations show that all men are capable of self-government? No such thing. It shows that none but an enlightened and virtuous people are capa- ble of it; and if the people of Louisiana are . not sufficiently enlightened, they are not yet prepared to receive it. When the people understand the value of laws equally and impartially administered, and begin to feel an attachment to the United States, and to inquire into the principles of free govern- ment, it will be time enough to give them the elective franchise."
Mr. Sloan expressed great surprise at the views of Mr. Holland. He asked, "Can anything be more repugnant to the principles of just government ?- can anything be more despotic. than for a President to appoint a Governor and Legislative Council, the Gov- ernor having a negative on all their acts and power to prorogue them at pleasure? What liberty, what power is here vested in the people ? . The only thing I want to know to decide the present question is, are they human beings possessed of rational understanding? If so give them an opportunity to prove it." Mr. Smilie of Pennsylvania could not see the danger of giv-
40
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
ing the Louisianians the elective franchise "while under the imme- diate control of the Government." Mr. Boyle of Kentucky advo- cated giving the people of Louisiana the privilege of electing their own representatives. A vote was then taken on the motion to strike out Section IV ; it was carried by 80 yeas to 15 nays.
A substitute for Section IV, offered by Mr. Campbell, provided that the governor and judges or a majority of them should "adopt and publish in the territory such laws of the original states as might be necessary and best suited to the circumstances of the territory," and in addition should make such other laws as seemed conductive to the greatest good of the inhabitants. The substi- tute also provided that the territory should be subdivided into counties, and that the general assembly or legislature should con- sist of a legislative council and a house of representatives. An amendment to the substitute requiring a jury trial in all criminal cases and in all civil cases over twenty dollars was lost by a majority of 20 votes. The substitute was also lost, yeas 37, nays 43.
The bill again came before the house on March 14. A motion to reduce the governor's salary to three thousand dollars was lost by a majority of four votes. Another amendment to extend to the inhabitants the naturalization act was lost by thirty-two major- ity. An amendment inhibiting the importation of slaves front any of the United States and from foreign countries was carried by a majority of four votes. An amendment to strike out the provision inflicting a fine of one thousand dollars for settling on government land in the Purchase was lost by twenty-three votes. The provision to render null and void all land grants after Octo- ber 1, 1800, was at first defeated, but was finally reconsidered and passed. Mr. Earle of South Carolina introduced a substitute for Section IV, which placed the legislative power in the hands of a governor and a legislative council appointed by the president. After the adoption of a few small amendments, the substitute was agreed to, yeas 58, nays 42,
President Jefferson, upon commissioning William C. C. Clai- borne as governor of the Louisiana Purchase, gave him nearly all the powers previously held by the Spanish governor-general and intendant. Claiborne had previously been governor of Mis- sissippi territory and was already in touch with the affairs west of the great river. Going from Mississippi territory, where he had exercised the powers only of an executive under the Federal constitution, he suddenly found himself called upon to administer the functions of the three departments: Executive, legislative
1
4I
LOUISIANA, THE TERRITORY OF ORLEANS.
and judicial. But this did not last long. He had hardly looked over his field of responsibility before the law of congress extended the acts governing the Northwest territory over the Louisiana Purchase and limited his domain to the country south of the thirty-third parallel and west of the Mississippi, except the island of New Orleans.
His first important measure was to organize the territorial courts, but he failed for some reason to please his fellow citizens. They complained that he was unfamiliar with the Louisiana law, and that he favored Americans as against the Creoles and Euro- pean French and Spanish residents. The act of March 26, 1804, changed this absolute despotism to the republican form of gov- ernment under the Federal constitution. It was this law which bound him to the territory south of the thirty-third parallel ; prior to its passage his rule over the whole of the Purchase was signal and absolute. When the Purchase was divided into the two ter- ritories, Orleans and Louisiana province, the people strenuously. objected. They did not wish to see their former boundless domain diminished, and protested to congress against the division, but their protest availed nothing. They likewise thought that under the terms of the cession of Louisiana, they should be admitted to immediate statehood. But congress determined that as they were wholly unfamiliar with the United States laws and constitu- tion, it would be better for them and for the other states if they should study the Federal institutions and laws a few years before their admission. The law prohibiting the importation of slaves except under certain conditions was not relished, but had resulted from the appeal to congress of an abolition convention which met in Philadelphia in January, 1804. Neither was the course of the United States in regard to the French and Spanish claims admitted to be just. In a letter to President Jefferson, Claiborne expressed the opinion that the inhabitants of Louisiana were incapable of self government. But the truth was that the people had altogether different ideas of government, and at the same time thought they were being imposed upon and oppressed. Claiborne said that the following were common and current expressions : "Is it in this way that we are secured the benefits that were to result to us from the cession of Louisiana by France ? Are these the liberties of which she seemed to have guaranteed to us the preservation by an express clause of the treaty? Is it thus that she calls us to the enjoyment of the rights, advantages and inminities of citizens of the United States?" Laussat said
42
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
that insurrection against the United States was openly advocated. in New Orleans.
Another important act of Claiborne was to establish the Bank of Louisiana. This was rendered necessary by the utter lack of the required ready money to effect exchanges. But the people seemed to think it was specially designed to rob them, as they had previously been deceived with paper money issues. But all dis- order was prevented, doubtless because of the presence of United States troops which Wilkinson, previous to his departure for New York, had posted at New Orleans, Natchitoches, Fort Adams and Pointe Coupee. The law which stipulated that the legislative council of Orleans territory should be selected by the president of the United States, and that all laws should have their inception in the brain of Claiborne, still further roused the indig- nation and suspicion of the old citizens. Meetings were held and congress was petitioned, and finally a deputation was sent to Washington to secure a redress of grievances. These delegates were Derbigny, Sauve and Destrehan. About this time the inhabitants of Feliciana and what is now East Baton Rouge, being mostly of English descent, and desiring to be attached to the United States, undertook to rebel against Spain, but were over- awed by an expedition sent against them.
On the first of October, 1804, the government of the territory of Orleans commenced operations. The following men appointed by President Jefferson constituted the first legislative council : Bellechasse, Poydras, Boré, Roman, De Buys, Clark, Dow, Cant- relle, Kenner, Morgan, Wikoff, Jones, and Watkins. Deponceau, Prevost and Kirby were the first judges of the supreme court. Dominic Hall was the first United States district judge. Prevost opened the first court of the territory in November, 1804. Sev- eral of the appointees to the legislative council refused to accept their seats; they were not yet in harmony with the Claiborne gov- ernment and thought their liberties were being curtailed. Clai- borne filled in the blanks which had been left for the purpose the names of Pollock, Dorciere, Flood and Mather to take the places of the four who had resigned.
The council, having secured a scant quorum by the fourth of December, 1804, organized and prepared for business. The ter- ritory was divided into twelve counties, and each was given an inferior court, with one judge, and the court procedure was prescribed. This council also made provision for a civil and criminal code to be prepared by two attorneys, and five thousand
43
LOUISIANA, THE TERRITORY OF ORLEANS.
dollars was appropriated to recompense them for their labor. Acts were passed, chartering New Orleans, providing for the inspection of flour, beef and pork, creating a state university, establishing navigation and insurance companies, and providing for the formation of a public library. The first twelve counties were as follows: Orleans, German Coast, Acadia, Lafourche, Iberville, Attakapas, Opelousas, Pointe Coupee, Rapides, Con- cordia, Onachita and Natchitoches.
Governor Claiborne seems to have taken a philosophical view of the action of the ancient Louisianians in entertaining prejudice against the American government. He said in 1804, "I received from the officers, civil and military, a zealous and able co-opera- tion in all measures for the public good and from the people in , general an indulgence and support which encouraged harmony and insured the supremacy of the law." But he also admitted the existing disaffection, and wrote to Mr. Madison in October, 1804, that the Spanish officers who still lingered in the territory encouraged the discontent. The task set Governor Claiborne was a difficult one. There sprang up from the start a strong jealousy between the "ancient Louisianians" and the "modern Louisi- anians," as the two factions came to be called. While Claiborne was regarded highly as an individual, his country was disliked by the old inhabitants, and it required years to uproot the racial prejudices. Numerous disagreements arose over almost every public question. The views were as different as the characteris- tics of the mixed races residing there. During it all the firmness, forbearance and fairness of Claiborne seem remarkable. In the case of Captain Garcia he exhibited great prudence and modera- tion. He softened the strictures of the law prohibiting the importation of slaves. The law itself was clandestinely violated, and many slaves were smuggled into the territory. In his mes- sage to the territorial legislature, he recommended the adoption of a system of public education and of measures to prevent the spread of yellow fever.
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.