USA > Michigan > Men of progress : embracing biographical sketches of representative Michigan men with an outline history of the state > Part 2
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
The first permanent settlement of Euro- peans in Michigan, having the elements of eivil life and municipal regulation, was that
2
MEN OF PROGRESS.
by Cadillac, at Detroit, in 1701. The French sovereignty was terminated by the surrender of Detroit to the British in November, 1760, as the result of the triumph of the British arms over the French in the war that had been waged for some years between the two nations, for supremacy in the western hemis- phere. The British occupation . continued until July 11, 1796, when the British gar- rison retired from Detroit and the flag of the Union was raised over Fort Shelby. Detroit was at that time the gateway to the northwest territory, and by its occupancy the sover- eignty of the United States was established over the entire territory between the great lakes on the north and the Ohio River on the south. Although this territory was eonceded to the United States by the peace of 1783, which terminated the war of the revolution, the oeeupancy of Detroit and Mackinac Island was continued by the British under various pretexts.
Under the French and British rule the Northwest Territory was politieally associated with the Canadas, but became a part of the territory of Virginia upon its occupancy by the United States. Both Connecticut and Massachusetts, however, asserted a color of title to portions of the territory now embraced in the State of Michigan. Connecticut claimed from the 41st parallel of latitude to 42° 2', and Massachusetts from the last named line to the 15th parallel. These claims were based upon their original charters, which defined their northern and southern bound- aries as above given, running from the sea- board west, and presumptively as far west as the possessions of the English crown, from which their eharters were derived, extended. Without disenssing the subjeet, it would seem that these elaims were more faneiful than real. But for the action of a Virginian, Gen. George Rogers Clarke, the entire Northwest Territory would have been lost to the United States, and the national boundary line would have been fixed at the Ohio River instead of the great lakes. Gen. Clarke was commis- sioned by the State of Virginia to undertake
a campaign against the British posts in the northwest, and was granted a small appro- priation for the purpose. His success secured the Northwest Territory to the United States in the peace settlement, which thereby be- came a part of the State of Virginia. This was the opinion held by the late Judge Charles I. Walker, of Detroit, who was con- sulted by the writer on the subject. Judge Walker had made the subject of northwest- ern history a study, and no one was better qualified than he to give an opinion with judicial fairness. However, in the cession of the Northwest Territory to the United States, the three States of Virginia, Connecticut and Massachusetts were severally parties. The land embraced in what is known as the West- ern Reserve, in Ohio, was conceded to Con- necticut in consideration of the release of her claimed sovereignty. That is, she "reserved" so much land, reserving title to it, while re- linquishing her claim of political sovereignty over the boundaries above described.
A brief reference to the history of the gen- eral government in its relation to territorial possession seems appropriate in this imme- diate connection, especially in view of the recently acquired foreign possessions. The constitution of the United States was adopted in convention in 1787, and the government went into effect under it, through its ratifica- tion by the requisite number of States, in 1789. Up to that time the general govern- ment was simply a confederation of sovereign states, with very limited powers, and eum- brous in its mechanism. It had, strictly speaking, no territorial jurisdiction. It did not, and could not, exercise sovereignty over a foot of land that was not included in some one of the States. Territories, as bodies politic, were unknown. But by the cession of the Northwest Territory, above referred to, a territorial condition was created, and for the purpose of government the ordinance of 1787 was adopted on July 13 of that year. This ordinanee was framed in conformity to the acts of cession, and provided for the ultimate division or organization of the territory into
3
HISTORICAL SKETCHES.
not less than three nor more than five States, of which the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illi- nois, Michigan and Wisconsin are the pro- duct. This assumption of territorial sover- eignty by the congress of the confederation was special, and under clearly defined terms, and its exereise was expected to terminate with the ereetion of the territory into States. The constitution adopted in September of the same year had in view the eeded territory when it provided that "The Con- gress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." The use of the words "ter- ritory or other property" leaves the clear in- ferenee that the word "territory" had refer- enee only to so much of the soil as might be the "property" of the United States, and not to the exereise of political sovereignty over limitless areas of the earth's surface. This
view of the matter is strengthened by clause 16, seetion 8, of the first artiele of the consti- tution, which gives to Congress exelusive jur- isdiction over such site as might be eeded by any of the States not exceeding ten miles square (now the District of Columbia), as the seat of the general government, and over such sites as might be acquired with the consent of the States in which located, for government uses. By this specifie grant of power the inhibition of similar power outside of it must be preserved. But the right of the govern- ment to acquire and exercise jurisdiction over outlaying territory has passed beyond dis- eussion. If not conferred by the constitu- tion, it is a right acquired by use and aequies- cenee, if it be not a right foreing itself upon a growing nation as a necessity. The subjeet has been so far treated, however, only for the purpose of showing how radical a departure from early traditions has taken place.
TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT.
The Ordinance of 1787-The Governor and Judges- A Landed Qualification-A Legislative Council Provided for-The Territory to Be Formed Into States-First Seat of Government-The Five States of the Northwest-Michigan as a Separate Territory-Large Grants of Land to Revolution- ary Heroes-Comparative Influence of Cities- The Landed Qualification Abrogated.
The Congress of the Confederation, by the ordinanee of July 13, 1787, provided that for the purposes of temporary government the ae- quired territory should "be one distriet, sub- jeet, however, to be divided into two distriets, as future circumstances may, in the opinion of Congress, make it expedient." Until such time as the distriet should contain five thous- and free male inhabitants of full age, the government and the making of laws was eom- mitted to a governor and three judges to be appointed by Congress. The governor must be the possessor of a freehold estate "in one thousand aeres of land." The judges, and a secretary whose appointment was provided for, must each have an estate of five hundred acres. When the distriet should contain the
requisite population, a representative assem- bly and council was provided for, analogous to a house of representatives and senate. The members of the assembly must have a free- hold estate of two hundred aeres, and only those possessed of a like estate could vote. The members of the council must each have an estate of five hundred aeres. No time or place is specified in the aet or ordinance when or where the government thus provided for should go into effeet.
Artiele 5 of the ordinance provides for the ultimate division of the territory into States, as previously noted. After the organization of the government under the constitution, an aet was passed August 7, 1789, vesting the appointment of the Governor and Judges in the President.
The first seat of government of the North- west Territory was at Chillicothe, in the now State of Ohio. By act of Congress of May 7, 1800, the territory was divided, prepara- tory to the admission of Ohio into the Union
4
MEN OF PROGRESS.
as a State, and the "Indiana Territory" was erected, with the seat of government at Vin- cennes.
By the act of January, 1805, the Territory of Michigan was set, off from the Indiana Ter- ritory, the same system of government being continued as originally provided, the seat of government being established at Detroit. By this aet the southern boundary of Michigan was fixed by a line drawn dne east from the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan umtil it intersect Lake Erie, and the western boundary a north and south line through Lake Michigan to the northern boundary of the United States, the British possessions forming the northern and eastern boundary. This ineluded on the south the strip of terri- tory that was subject of dispute with Ohio, and did not include the northern or Upper Peninsula. By act of Congress February 3, 1809, the territory now forming the States of Illinois and Wisconsin was detacher from the Indiana Territory and given a separate terri- torial organization. Upon the admission of Illinois into the Union as a State in 1818, the Wisconsin portion was made a part of the Michigan Territory, but was detached in 1836 and given a territorial government by itself. It was made a State in 1848, thus completing the quintet of States as contemplated by the ordinance of 1787, Indiana having been ad- mitted in 1816.
Aside from the mere narration of events in connection with the government of the North- west Territory and its organization into States of the Union, the property qualifica- tion required as a condition of holding office and voting will strike the citizen of the pres- ent day forcibly, to say the least. No matter what the position or standing of the person might be, or what the value of his possessions other than land, he must be possessed of so mneh land in the district. But the condition, imposed at the time, was by no means a strange or imusual one. Our civil polity was inherited from England, where the landed proprietors were the governing class. The in- terests of the realm were deemed safer in the hands of this class than in those of the city denizen. The influence of eities in faet, even in the older countries, had not reached the
magnitude to which it has sinee attained. There is perhaps another reason by which this landed qualification may be explained. Large grants of land had been made to indi- viduals in consideration of their services in the war of the revolution, or seeured by other means. The act of Virginia in eeding the Northwest Territory contained a stipulation that a traet of one hundred and fifty thousand aeres in one body should be assured to Gen. George Rogers Clarke and the soldiers of his command in recognition of their serviees in the war of the revolution, and that other grants should be assured to other persons for similar services. It is a fair presumption that those holding these grants were influential in seenring the adoption of the landed qualifiea- tion in the governing act, in order that they might thereby wield the political power. But the territory became rapidly settled by small proprietors as well as by those without hold- ings of any kind, and in the organization of the new States the property qualification was not imposed. It is worthy of mention, how- ever, that in the earlier days of the republic a property qualification was the rule in most of the States, and is no doubt still the practice in some of them. Another faet is worthy of special note, namely, that by the growth of the cities the political power has become largely eentered in them, with a correspond- ing diminution of influence and power on the part of the rural population,
The landed qualification for holding office and voting necessarily governed in Michigan until it was changed by aet of Congress. In the matter of choosing a delegate to Congress from Michigan there was an authorized de- parture from the terms of the ordinance. The latter provided that the delegate should be elected by the Legislative Council, but Con- gress, by act of February 16, 1819, anthor- ized the election of a delegate from Michigan by popular vote, all white male citizens twenty-one years of age, who had resided in the territory one year, and who had paid a county or territorial tax, being entitled to vote for such delegate. By a subsequent aet the right to vote at all elections, and to hold office, was similarly conferred.
5
HISTORICAL SKETCHES.
ORGANIZATION OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
The Right to Statehood-Adoption of the Constitu- tion and Election of State Officers-Meeting of the Legislature-Election of United States Sena- tors-The Disputed Boundary-Objections to the Admission of the State-Judge Campbell's View of the Case, and Other Authorities-Terms Pro- posed by Congress-Military Demonstrations-A New Territorial Governor Appointed-The Slav- ery Question a Factor-Two Conventions of Assent-Final Admission of the State-Calender of Events Leading Up to Statehood-Seat of Government and State Capitol.
The resident population of Michigan, other than Indian, when it came into possession of the United States, was very small. It is given as 551 in the year 1800; 4,762 in 1810; 8,896 in 1820, and 31,639 in 1830. The last named deeade shows a marked increase as compared with the one immediately. pre- eeding. But the ratio of inerease was greatly exceeded during the next decade, 1830 to 1840, when the population had reached 212,- 267. The increase was so marked up to the middle of the deeade (87,273, according to a eensus taken by authority of the Legislative Couneil in 1834), that steps were taken for the organization of a State goverment. This step the people of the territory, represented by their Legislative Council, had a right to take, without an enabling aet by Congress, as has been the eustom with reference to inehoate States other than those forming part of the Northwest Territory, and as was done also in the ease of Illinois. The ordinance of 1787, as has been heretofore stated, pro- vided that the territory should ultimately be formed into States, one or two of which should be north of a given line.
Congress had already (1835), and long be- fore that time, organized three States sonth of the line, though encroaching upon territory north of it. It had organized one Territory (Michigan) north of the line, with defined boundaries, and there was no moral question but that this territory would form one State, and that the remaining territory north of the line would form another State. Michigan, therefore, aeting under the clause of the or-
dinance which provided that when any State should have sixty thousand free inhabitants it should "be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and State government," and be admitted as a member of the confederation on a perfect equality with the other States, took steps in the year 1835 for assuming full statehood. An aet was passed by the Legis- lative Council January 26, 1835, for an elec- tion to be held on Saturday, the 4th day of the following April, for the choice of delegates to a convention to frame a State constitution. The convention was to meet at the capitol in Detroit on the second Monday of May, with power to adjourn its sitting to any other place within the Territory. The convention met on the second Monday of May and eoneluded its work in Detroit. The constitution framed by it was submitted to a vote of the people on the first Monday of October, State offieers and a legislature being chosen at the same time-the election of the latter to have effeet only in case of the ratifieation of the eonstitu- tion by popular vote. The constitution was, however, adopted by a vote of 6,299 in its favor to 1,359 against. The Legislature met and organized on the first Monday of Novem- ber, the Governor and Lieutenant Governor were duly installed (Stevens T. Mason, known as the boy Governor, as Governor, and Ed- ward Mundy as Lieutenant Governor), and the wheels of the State government were formally set in motion. One of the earliest acts of the Legislature was the election of two United States senators, John Norvel and Ineius Lyon being chosen. Isaae E. Crary had been elected member of the lower house of Congress at the October election. Thus far the new ship of state (to use a metaphor) had proceeded on its voyage without a ripple, but breakers were ahead.
The constitution of the State, and her appli- cation for admission as a State of the Union, were submitted to the United States Senate December 9, 1835, in a message from Presi- dent Jackson. A motion to admit the sena-
6
MEN OF PROGRESS.
tors from Michigan to seats on the floor of the Senate met with opposition. The eonstitu- tion of the State, as adopted, placed its south- ern boundary on the line designed by the or- dinance, namely, on "an east and west line drawn through the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan." This would inelude a strip of land some ten miles in width then belonging, or claimed to belong to Ohio, and including the city of Toledo, and a strip of greater width in Indiana, from the Ohio line to Lake Michigan. If the principle were ad- mitted also, that the exaet terms of the ordi- nance were to govern, it would rob Illinois of a broad strip on her northern border, in- elnding the city of Chicago, which would have gone to Wisconsin. The admission of Michigan, therefore, with her claimed bound- ary, was resisted especially by the three States of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. It was also objected that she had assumed State sover- eighty without the assent of Congress pre- viously obtained in the form of an enabling act. This, as has been shown foregoing, she had a right to do, and this right is conceded by President Jackson in his message before mentioned.
It would be outside the purpose of this sketch, and exceed its prescribed limits, to trace the history of the controversy or the evi- denee on which the conflicting claims were based. Judge Campbell, in his "Outlines of the Civil History of Michigan," treats the elaim of Michigan as conclusive, both in law and justice. But the three States of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois had previously had the sanction of Congress, either direct or implied, to their northern boundary lines. They had at least title by possession. The gordion knot was eut so far as Congress was concerned, by the passage at the session of 1836, of an aet fixing the southern boundary of Michigan as now established, and giving her the Upper Peninsula in consideration of the surrender by her of her elaim of title to the disputed strip, and providing for the admission of the State upon her aceeptance of the same. The merits of the controversy are disenssed at
some length by Judge Campbell, and the whole subject is quite fully treated in a mono- graph, with many eitations of authorities, by Annah May Soule, of the State Univer- sity, published by the Michigan Political seienee Association. There is a collection of pamphlets in a bound volume in the hands of the State Librarian (the only one in existence so far as known), that gives much valuable information on the subject in the form of official documents.
The subject of the northern boundary of Ohio was agitated at the time of her admis- sion into the Union, and her right to the claimed line was called in question. It at- tracted the attention of the Michigan authori- ties as early as 1820, as appears from eom- munications of Gov. Woodbridge (then see- retary of the Territory and acting-Governor), addressed to Gov. Brown, of Ohio, and to John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State of the United States. When it was proposed to form a State goverment in Michigan and to assert jurisdiction over the disputed terri- tory, the Legislature of Ohio, aeting under the advice of Gov. Lncas, passed aets asserting jurisdiction, and looking to military measures to support the claim. Counter steps were taken by the Legislative Couneil of Michi- gan, and military forces were mustered on both sides of the border, but withont eoming into actual collision. Stevens T. Mason, as secretary of the Territory, was then acting- Governor, and it was under his advice and direction that these steps were taken. His action not being approved by President Jaek- son, the President in August, 1835, appointed Charles Shaler, of Pennsylvania, to succeed him. Mr. Shaler having declined the ap- pointment, John S. Horner, of Virginia, was appointed on September 15. He reached De- troit a few days later, but was eoolly received. The people looked forward to their coming statehood as the solution of their civil status, and regarded a change in the territorial ex- ecutive at the time, which they deemed could be for bnt a few weeks, as unnecessary if not offensive. Gov. Mason made no objection to
7
HISTORICAL SKETCHES.
Mr. Horner assuming the nominal duties of acting-Governor, but the latter performed no official acts of importance. By direction of President Jackson he refused to recognize the State 'officers after they were elected, and under other circumstances a conflict of au- thority might have occurred. But he perhaps thought prudence the better part of valor, and removed to Wisconsin, which was still a part of the Territory of Michigan. Here he could execute the functions of Governor of Michigan, with Michigan left out.
The interests of the then slave States en- tered more or less into the problem regarding Michigan. Up to the time of which we are writing and for some years subsequently, the effort was continued to maintain a sort of "balance of power" between the free and slave States. They being equal in number, the study was to keep them so, so that each section would have equal representation in the United States Senate. Michigan would, of course, be a free State. Arkansas, lying south of Missouri, and forming a part of the Louisiana purchase, was prepared to enter the Union as a slave State. Her population was much less than that of Michigan, but it was within the power of Congress to admit a State regardless of the number of inhabitants. The acts, therefore, for the admission of both States, were made concurrent, but with the difference that the admission of Arkansas be- came at once a fact, while the admission of Michigan was made contingent upon the con- dition elsewhere spoken of.
The Legislature, by act of July 25, 1836, ordered an election to be held for delegates to a convention to act upon the terms pro- posed by Congress. The sentiment of the people, without party division, was generally adverse to accepting those terms, and the dele- gates elected reflected this sentiment. The covention, which met at Ann Arbor Septem- ber 26, voiced the popular sentiment by rc- jecting the proposed condition. This has been called the first convention of assent, though it was more properly a convention of dissent. The people, however, had become impatient
and restive under the delay and the uncer- tainty of their position. The administration at Washington was democratic, and members of the Democratic party in Michigan desired a completed statehood to be in harmony with the national administration. Democratic conventions in Wayne and Washtenaw Coun- ties had declared in favor of another conven- tion, and acting upon this demand several gentlemen, members of the Democratic party in Detroit, united in a call for a convention to be held at Ann Arbor on December 14. An election for delegates was held December 5 and 6. The convention met and agreed to the terms proposed by Congress. The whole proceeding was irregular, but met a sort of silent acquiescence as the solution of a trou- blesome problem. Some protest was made in Congress by reason of the irregularity, but the existence of the State government was formally recognized by the admission of its Senators and its one Representative January 26, 1837.
The following calendar shows the order in which the several steps leading up to the ad- mission of the State into the Union were taken:
Jan. 26, 1835: Act of the Legislative Council providing for an election of delegates to a con- vention to frame a constitution.
April 4, 1835: Delegates elected.
May 11, 1835: Convention met; adjourned June 24.
Oct. 6, 1835: Constitution ratified by popular vote; Legislature and State officers elected.
Nov. 3, 1835: Legislature met; State officers installed.
Dec. 9, 1835: Constitution and application for admission submitted to Congress by the Presi- dent.
June. 15, 1836: Act of Congress (with condition of boundary) passed for admission of State. July 25, 1836: Act of Legislature authorizing first convention of assent.
Sept. 12, 1836: Election of delegates to conven- tion.
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.