USA > Missouri > Centennial history of Missouri (the center state) one hundred years in the Union, 1820-1921, Volume I > Part 23
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 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114
Benton afterwards held that the clause in the constitution depriving the legislature of any power to emancipate slaves without the consent of their owners had its origin in the purpose of the framers to keep the slavery ques- tion out of state politics. Resentment on the part of the Missourians toward Congress had considerable influence upon the framers of the constitution. When Congress refused to accept the constitution and to admit the state, the indigna- tion increased and was general throughout the state. The St. Louis Enquirer, Benton's organ, pronounced the constitution "immortal."
Benton "Accidentally" Turned Down.
Benton was not a member of the constitutional convention. He expected to be. A caucus to decide on "candidates opposed to restrictions on slavery" was held the 10th of April. It was a secret affair. Benton supposed that he would be one of the eight agreed upon. He had led the fight as writer of the editorials in the St. Louis Enquirer. But when the vote was taken in the caucus the eight men selected were William Rector, David Barton, John C. Sullivan, Alex- ander McNair, Bernard Pratte, Edward Bates, Wilson P. Hunt and Pierre Chouteau, Jr. St. Louis county was entitled to eight members in the conven- tion. The caucus ticket went through with a single exception. Thomas F. Rid- dick was elected instead of Wilson P. Hunt ..
Following the announcement of the caucus action, the absence of the name of Benton caused a good deal of talk. A call was issued upon Benton to become a candidate. It referred to the "accidental result" of the caucus.
"The undersigned have long calculated on your services in the state con- vention, and wish to avail themselves of them. We do not consider ourselves bound by the accidental result of the late meeting of the friends of those opposed to the restriction or limitation of slavery; especially in point of fact, the voters are not bound by it; and many others are still before the public who were not represented in that meeting ; so the end in view has not been attained, and we are still subjected to the danger of division and want of concert in voting, without having our choice of candidates-under these circumstances we request you let your name be used as a candidate for the convention."
The call had 138 signatures. Benton replied, acknowledging the letter "in which you request me to let my name be used as a candidate for the convention."
"Until the 10th inst. it was my expectation that it would have been so used. On that day the friends of the candidates met to agree upon the names which should be sup-
191
THREE ORGANIC ACTS
ported. My name was not so agreed upon :- You have the kindness to advert to the circumstance and to say that you do not consider yourselves bound by the accidental result of that meeting. Neither do I. But it has operated upon me with the effect of an obligation, because I could not afterwards stand a poll without dividing the strength of our own side, and endangering the success of a cause which I have long labored to promote."
The Cudgel Argument.
The Missouri Gazette could not let go by the opportunity to hold up to ridi- cule the "co-editor" of the Enquirer for having been turned down by the acci- dental result of the caucus. Referring to the call upon Mr. Benton to run, the editor of the Gazette said: "I should have been glad that a list had been also made of the persons who refused to sign in favor of Mr. Benton. Some say that their number and respectability would have disclosed the secret and satis- fied every one that prudence had also some share in actuating him to decline standing the poll."
This and more the Gazette printed upon Benton's relations to the conven- tion campaign. Two hours after the Gazette was off the press the following occurred, as told in the next issue of the paper :
"The editor of the Missouri Gazette whilst on the way from his office to his house, between one and two o'clock, on Wednesday, was assailed without any previous intima- tion, warning or apparent quarrel by Isaac N. Henry, one of the editors of the St. Louis Enquirer, and received several blows with a heavy cudgel, which blows he returned with a stick disproportionately small; the combatants closed, fell and struggled for awhile. The Rev. Joseph Piggot, who was accompanying Mr. Charless and was going to dine with him, twice endeavored to part them, but was as often prevented by a certain Wharton Rector, who drew a pistol from his bosom, and declared he would blow him through if he interfered. Mr. Piggot then called for help, being determined to part them; presently two men came up and the contest ended."
The Gazette attributed the attack to Benton and quoted him as having said there were "two or three hundred citizens who" at one word would tear to pieces any person whom he would point out.
Fathers of the State.
Who were the fathers of the state? Mr. Shoemaker has laid Missourians under obligations many times for the information he has assembled in his "Missouri's Struggle for Statehood." His personal data respecting the framers of the constitution is not only interesting; it is significant. The members of the constitutional convention were forty-one in number. Most of them were of English descent ; two were Welsh; two were Scotch; four were Irish; four were Scotch-Irish; two were French; one was German. As regarded nativity, these founders of the new state were better distributed in respect to the rest of the United States than is generally understood. Mr. Shoemaker, by exhaus- tive inquiry, learned that the convention membership included native sons of Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, North Carolina, Upper Louisiana as it was under Spanish dominion, Indiana, New York, Vermont, South Carolina, Wales, and Ireland. While the Virginia-born led in number,
192
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
only three of them had come directly from that state to settle in Missouri. The important and impressive fact is that these forty-one fathers of the state rep- resented all sections of the United States, as this nation then existed, and the principal countries of Europe.
Representative government found its perfect expression in the making of this first constitution of Missouri. The constitution was not submitted to popu- lar vote. It went into effect at once. There was nothing in the enabling act that required submission. The convention made no provision to have the con- stitution passed upon by popular vote. The people had named their best men to do the work and were satisfied, so well satisfied indeed that the constitution endured forty-five years.
Why Benton Favored Missouriopolis.
While the constitutional convention was working on that part of the organic act providing for the permanent- capital of the state, Delegate McFerron pro- posed that the name be "Missouriopolis," instead of Jefferson City. This sug- gestion struck the classical taste of Benton as eminently fitting. The St. Louis Enquirer supported the proposition, mentioning several European cities which bore names of like derivation and referring to Galliopolis, Demopolis and An- napolis in the United States. The Enquirer said that the name offered for the capital of the new state "translated means City of Missouri":
"Men of letters throughout Europe and America, hearing it pronounced, will know what is spoken of and where it is. Letters started from London, Paris or Boston, will arrive at their destination without mistakes, and without the circumlocution of a tedious address, without making a pilgrimage to forty places of like names, or having a treatise of geography written on their backs to keep on the right road."
Distinctive Provisions of the First Organic Act.
One of the distinctive features of Missouri's first organic act was the facile method provided for making changes. The legislature could by a two-thirds voté propose an amendment. This proposition was published three times within the twelve months before the next general election. At the first session following the general election the legislature could, by a two-thirds vote, adopt the amend- ment. As Missourians had in 1820 left to the convention the forming of the organic act without a vote of the people, so they carried out the theory of rep- resentative government by giving to the legislature the power to make changes on which the people had been informed by the publication. At the time Mis- souri entered statehood with the first organic act only one other state had this method of making changes in the constitution. Subsequently, Missouri abandoned the method and required ratification of the new constitution by popular vote.
One feature of the first organic act was continued in the subsequent consti- tutions of Missouri. That provision forbade the right of suffrage to any soldier, seaman or marine of the regular army and navy. This prohibition was continued through the century of statehood. Missouri stood with seven other states in this prohibition against military influence in elections.
Alexander McNair, 1820-1824
Frederick Bates, 1824-1826
John Miller, 1826-1832
Daniel Dunklin, 1832-1836
Lilburn W. Boggs, 1836-1840
Thomas Reynolds, 1840-1844
GOVERNORS OF MISSOURI
Vol.I-13
1
195
THREE ORGANIC ACTS
Missouri's "Armorial Achievement."
The first organic act provided for a state seal, or, as the description had it, "an armorial achievement for the State of Missouri." The section of the constitution of 1820 read: "The secretary of state shall, as soon as may be, procure a seal of state, with such emblems and devices as shall be directed by law, which shall not be subject to change. It shall be called the 'Great scal of the State of Missouri"; shall be kept by the secretary of state, and all official acts of the governor, his approbation of the laws excepted, shall be thereafter authenticated." The constitutions of 1865 and 1875 followed that of 1820 in respect to the seal and provided that "the emblems and devices thereof, hereto- fore prescibed by law, shall not be subject to change." Missouri's armorial achievement, or coat of arms as it might be more commonly called has stood for a century without change and cannot be changed save by constitutional amendment or a new constitution.
When the legislature met in St. Charles, November, 1821, Governor McNair called attention to the constitutional requirement of a great seal and the law makers referred the subject to a special committee composed of Chauncey Smith, Alcorn and Elliot. Action was prompt. On the 11th of January, 1822, the act providing for the great seal, with the armorial achievement, was ap- proved by the governor. Presumably the real work had been done before the legislature met. Tradition attributes the authorship of Missouri's rather elab- orate coat of arms to Judge Nathaniel Beverly Tucker whom Louis Houck pronounced "one of the most learned and accomplished residents of Missouri." Probably there was no other citizen of the new state who could have put so much of heraldic significance in a seal. Judge Tucker presided in the famous Stokes case, the most sensational litigation in the early history of Missouri. He went back to Virginia where his scholarly qualities won him the presidency of William and Mary college.
A Masterpiece in Heraldry.
The specifications for the great seal, as adopted by the legislature in Jan- uary, 1822, are mystifying to the average democratic American but a delight to the students of heraldry. They provided :
"That the device for an armorial achievement for the state of Missouri shall be as follows, to-wit :
"Arms-Parted per pale; on the dexter side, gules, the white or grizzly bear of Mis- souri, passant, guardant, proper; on a chief engrailed, azure, a crescent, argent; on the sinister side, argent, the arms of the United States, the whole within a band inscribed with the words, 'United we stand, divided we fall.'
"For the Crest-Over a helmet full faced, grated with six bars, or (gold), a cloud proper, from which ascends a star argent, and above it a constellation of twenty-three smaller stars, argent, on an azure field, surrounded by a cloud proper.
"Supporters-On each side, a white or grizzly bear of Missouri, rampant, guardant, standing on a scroll inscribed with the motto, 'Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto,' and under the scroll in numerical letters MDCCCXX."
196
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
The Great Seal Interpreted.
That the Missourians of one hundred years ago and those who came after might be informed of what the designer of the coat of arms had in mind, an explanation, or interpretation, more or less informative was printed about the time of the adoption. Tradition attributes the interpretation to Judge Tucker:
"The arms of the State of Missouri and of the United States, empaled together yet separated by a pale, denote the connection existing between the two governments, and show that although connected by a compact, yet we are independent as to internal con- cerns; the words surrounding the shield denote the necessity of the union. Quadrupeds are the most honorable bearing. The great grizzly bear being almost peculiar to the Missouri river and its tributaries, and remarkable for its prodigious size, strength and courage, is borne as the principal charge of our shield. The color of the shield is red and denotes hardihood and valor. The chief is, most honorable of all ordinaries.
"The color blue signifies vigilance, perseverance and justice. The crescent in heraldry is borne on the shield by the second son, and on our shield denotes that we are the sec- ond state (Louisiana being the first) formed out of the territory not within the original territorial limits of the United States. The crescent also denotes the growing situation of the state as to its inhabitants, wealth and power. The color white signifies purity and innocence. The helmet indicates enterprise and hardihood. The one blazoned on this coat of arms that assigned to sovereigns only. The star ascending from a cloud to join the constellation shows Missouri surmounting her difficulties and taking her rank among the states of the Union. The supporters, the same powerful animals borne on the shield, on which are emblazoned the arms of the state and of the United States, . denote that while we support ourselves by internal strength we are also in support of the general government. The motto shows that the good of the people is the supreme law of the state. The numerals under the scroll show the date of the constitution."
The Lawmakers Wanted a Cock or an Eagle.
The legislators accepted the design of the great seal without much discus- sion. The House favored "a cock close around, resting on a sheaf of wheat." The senate voted to strike out "cock" and insert "an eagle," but in the end the "armorial achievement" of Tucker was adopted. It is a rather curious fact that in the official description of the seal the word designating the bear is spelled "grizzly."
Ten years ago, when the St. Louis court of appeals decided to have the great seal painted in proper colors over the bench of the court, Judge George D. Reynolds made an investigation in detail of Missouri's armorial achievement .. He quoted the law and interworded it in such manner as to make it intelligible and interesting to the man on the street having historical leaning :
"The terms 'right' (dexter) and 'left' (sinister) refer to the right or left of the bearer of the shield, not to the right or left of the one in front of and looking at it. The armorial bearings (arms) shall be 'parted per pale,' that is to say, not by a pale, but as if by, or in the manner of, a pale. The pale is a band or stripe, running longi- tudinally through the center of the shield, and one-third of its width. 'Parted per pale' does not mean a division of the bearings by 'a pale,' but a division by a line drawn down the center of the shield, as in the. 'pale' but not of the width of a pale proper, and it is usually the sixteenth of an inch or less wide. To put it more clearly, this rather heavy. line is drawn through the center of the shield, from top to bottom, and the bearings placed to the right and left of it. That is what is meant by the term 'arms parted per pale.' The thirteen strips alternating red and white on the shield of the United States are
197
THREE ORGANIC ACTS
called 'paleways' or 'paly,' as when the shield is divided into equal parts-four or'more -by perpendicular lines.
"The 'bearings' are the figures or devices included within the , circular band; they are also called 'arms.'
"On the dexter (right) side of this line, and on a red (gules) field, the white or grizzly bear of Missouri walking (passant), with face turned outward (guardant), and in natural color (proper). Oir the upper third (chief) of that half of the shield to the right of the center line, and 'on a blue (azure) field, engrailed (that is with an indented line on the lower border), a 'crescent,' which, in heraldry, is the half moon with horns turned upward, in silver (argent); on the left (sinister) side of the dividing line, and on a silver (argent) field, the arms of the United States. All of these bearings to be within a band inscribed with the words, 'United We Stand, Divided We Fall.'
"Above this achievement is the 'crest,' which comprises the devices or emblems over the arms. Our crest consists of a full-faced gold (or) helmet, with six gold bars; above the helmet, a cloud in natural color (proper) from which ascends a silver (argent) star ; above this star a constellation of twenty-three smaller stars, also silver, on a blue (azure) field, surrounded by a cloud in natural color (proper).
"As 'supporters,' that is to say, figures, usually of animals, on either side of the shield appears 'a white grizzly bear of Missouri,' standing upright on his hind legs (ram- pant), and with face turned outward (guardant), and in natural color (proper), the bears standing on a scroll inscribed with the motto, 'Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto' (Let the Safety of the People be the Supreme Law)."
Did Judge Tucker Put One Over?
Was there deep political significance in the "armorial achievement" of Mis- souri? Was Judge Tucker's carefully devised coat of arms for the new state loaded? The judge was intense in his devotion to state sovereignty. Louis Houck, in his History of Missouri, says that Judge Tucker "was a pronounced advocate of the rights of the states, an idea that seems to pervade the entire , armorial bearings of Missouri." Judge Tucker lived until about 1851. He pre- dicted the Civil war and wrote a wonderful prophetic novel, "The Partisan Leader." In his interpretation of the coat of arms he called the connection be- tween Missouri and the Union a "compact" and said, "yet we are independent as to internal concerns." But Judge Reynolds' study of the seal led him to this conclusion :
"If the idea of state sovereignty, as paramount over national unity and allegiance, was in the mind of the designer of our armorial, bearings, he was unfortunate in his choice of heraldic symbols, which should be expressive of that idea. The arms of the state are not separated from those of the United States 'by a pale,' as we have before noted, but 'as by a (per) pale,' a mere line, employed in heraldry, for example, to sep- arate the armorial devices of the husband from the wife when both are displayed on the same shield; so as to emphasize a complete union. The use of the expression 'em. paled together' is also unfortunate for the contention of state sovereignty. The term means 'placed side by side each occupying one-half the shield,' not separated by a pale one-third the width of the shield, but by a thin line.
"Furthermore, the idea of state sovereignty apart from national union is emphatically negatived by the motto, 'United We' Stand, Divided We Fall.' This motto surrounds the arms of the state and of the nation. The great grizzlies are standing upon the scroll which proclaims the safety of the people to be the supreme law. These grizzlies, ram- pant and watchful, are guarding the declaration of union and nationality. But the motto enforcing the necessity of union is not the motto of the bears; bears, especially grizzlies, stand alone. They here stand as pledging their valor and that of the state they repre- sent to that union."
- 198
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
Marshall on the Rights of Congress.
Was there ground for Jefferson's apprehension that "the Missouri question is a breaker on which we lose the Missouri country by revolt and what more God only knows?" What basis had Benton on which to build his threat in the Enquirer after the enabling act had passed that if Congress had imposed "the odious restriction," Missourians would have "proceeded to the formation of a republican constitution in the fulness of the people's powers." The prolonged debates in Congress, the columns upon columns of argument and opinion in the newspapers of that period show that it was an open question what power the United States had "to acquire foreign territory and to govern the inhabitants of the same." Ten years later the question was settled by the Supreme Court of the United States and in a way which seems to have left little foundaion for either Jefferson or Benton in the views expressed as to what Missouri could have done.
There came before the court of last resort in 1828 the case of The American Insurance company vs. Canter. While the case involved the status of a territorial court in Florida which had been acquired under treaty, the real issue was the relation of Florida, then a territory, to the United States. It involved the rights of the inhabitants of acquired territory under the Constitution of the United States. Chief Justice Marshall rendered one of his most celebrated opinions and it be- came the law of the land. That opinion declared "the authority and power of the United States to acquire foreign territory and to deal with its inhabitants according to the terms of the treaty under which such territory was acquired, as the Congress of the United States might decide."
Beveridge's Comments on Marshall.
Beveridge, in his Life of John Marshall, devoted painstaking inquiry into this issue of the right of Congress to impose the slavery condition on Missouri. He quoted the resolution adopted by the Virginia legislature in 1820, which de- clared that "Virginia will support the good people of Missouri in their just rights and will cooperate with them in resisting with manly fortitude any at- tempt which Congress may make to impose restraints or restrictions as the price of their admission to the Union."
At that time Marshall was taking his stand, in successive Supreme Court de- cisions, for nationalism. Beveridge quoted from a decision in the case of McCul- loch vs. Maryland wherein the court held that Maryland's law taxing the Balti- more branch of the United States bank was contrary to the Constitution. Mar- shall declared for "the general right of sovereignty which exists in the govern- ment." As Beveridge pointed out, Marshall held at the period of the Missouri question, that in legislating for the territories, "Congress exercises the combined powers of the general and a state government."
"Ceded territory becomes a part of. the nation to which it is annexed; but the relations of the inhabitants to each other (do not) undergo any change." Their allegiance is transferred ; but the law "which regulates the intercourse and general conduct of individuals remains in force until altered by the newly created power of the state."
Marshall settled, by the Supreme Court decisions, the question which had
4
1
199
THREE ORGANIC ACTS
arisen with Thomas Jefferson about the Louisiana Purchase. He held that under the Constitution the United States "possesses the power of acquiring ter- ritory either by purchase or conquest." Beveridge concluded :
"For it should be repeated, in announcing the principles by virtue of which Congress could establish the Bank of the United States, the chief justice had also asserted, by necessary inference, the power of the national legislature to exact the exclusion of slavery as a condition upon which a state could be admitted to the Union."
Second Constitutional Convention.
In 1844 many Missourians thought the state had outlived the work of Bar- ton, Bates and their associates. Under the old, each county was entitled to one member in the lower house. One of the chief arguments for a new instrument was that the populous counties ought to have more than one representative. The legislature provided for the election of delegates by districts. The convention sat in 1845. Among the framers were Missourians who had held or were to hold high official station. The roll included James H. Green, Thomas L. Anderson, Hancock Jackson, Uriel Wright, Claiborne F. Jackson and Trusten Polk. Two of the younger members, James O. Broadhead and B. F. Massey, were to participate in the making of another constitution just thirty years later. Robert W. Wells was president. When the proposed constitution was submitted in 1846 it was beaten by 9,000 adverse majority. The total vote polled was only 45,000. Walter Williams said this was "an excellent instrument. The rejection was largely the result of the objection of William Campbell and his newspaper, the New Era, of St. Louis. Mr. Campbell was opposed to the section of the constitution which changed the plan of the choice of supreme judges from appointment by the governor to election by the people. Though they rejected the new constitution the people at the next election ratified an amendment to the old constitution making the supreme judges elective."
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.