USA > Ohio > Ross County > Chillicothe > Ohio centennial anniversary celebration at Chillicothe, May 20-21, 1903 : under the auspices of the Ohio State Archaelogical and Historical Society : complete proceedings > Part 10
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
On Christmas Eve, Mr. Baldwin had collected a mob at a certain house in this town, and was proceeding at the head of them to my quar- ters, where about one-half of the legislature are also quartered, in order to burn the Governor in effigy before the house, when he was met by Mr. Worthington and only prevented from it by the firm and reiterated declaration that, if he proceeded, he (Mr. Worthington), would put him to death with his own hands. On Christmas evening a new mob as- sembled at the quarters of the members and in a very rude manner forced into the room where they had dined, calling for liquor - saying it was a tavern and they had an equal right to that room with many others, and it was not long before one of the members was collared. I had retired to my chamber and was in the act of writing to you when the affair happened, and by my exertions and that of the peace officers, it was quelled, and the people dispersed, and the affair brought before the legis- lature on Monday, the justice having refused to bind them over. It is probable that it will be very differently represented. But Mr. Worthing- ton was on the spot, who not only prevented the first insult (which I should certainly have laughed at) but had he not come to that house on Christmas night * * * after I had gone to bed, and some of the more violent returned, the consequences would have been of the most serious nature, for the gentlemen expected. it, and were armed to defend themselves.
89
Ohio Centennial.
JOHN CLEVES SYMMES TO GRIFFIN GREENE.
WASHINGTON CITY, 21st of January, 1802.
I believe the Governor will soon have his own hands full of con- tention and vexation. He pretends to be wise enough to dictate to others - let us see whether he be wise enough to acquit himself of crimes and malpractices in his office, of which he is now charged by Col. Worth- ington and Mr. Baldwin. The complaint is now before the President. Though I have not seen a list of charges, yet I believe they are and might be numerous. I think our territory will not be divided by Con- gress, a majority of whom are wishing us to become a free state, as they presume if Governor St. Clair, that old aristocratic sinner was once out of the way we should all be honest and wise enough to make good republicans.
JOHN CLEVES SYMMES TO RETURN JONATHAN MEIGS, SR. CINCINNATI, October the 20th, 1806.
Permit me to enquire how much the sum is which Congress has allowed to each of the late judges of the Territory, N. W. of the Ohio, as arrears of their salaries due from the date of the sitting of the late Convention until the full organization of the new government of the State of Ohio, for I never could learn the precise sum that is coming to me as a compensation for their withholding my salary during that sort of interregnum.
THE ORGANIZATION AND ADMISSION OF OHIO INTO THE UNION AND THE GREAT SEAL OF THE STATE.
RUSH R. SLOANE.
We assemble on this occasion to celebrate the centennial of a great state, and the executive committee have assigned me the pleasing duty of delivering an address upon the date of the Organization of Ohio and Admission to the Union, and the Great Seal of the State.
One hundred years ago on the. ninth of last November, a small body of thirty-five of the most intelligent men in the counties of the then east- ern division of the territory north- west of the river Ohio, who had, since the first of the month, been gathered, in this then primitive village of Chil- licothe, solemnly affixed their names to the first constitution of Ohio. This instrument made Chillicothe the cap- RUSH R. SLOANE. ital of the new state, and fixed the time for the completion of its organization as the first Tuesday in March, 1803, (being the first day of March.)
Ohioans ought indeed to be gratified in view of the admir- able way in which the territory and state were settled; this be- gan just after the War of Independence, and one may say, largely settled under the direction of men who had been enlarged in mind by the war, and by the period of constitutional construc- tion following it.
Then its settlement synchronized with the revival of Chris-
90
ยท
91
Ohio Centennial.
tian belief and the home missionary activity which marked the beginning of the nineteenth century.
Besides this, and most educative, it was settled just at the time when the older states had taken up the questions of the pop- ular and higher education, but had not answered them; so that Ohio's contributions to the cause of education were not mere imitation and repetition of older institutions and policies, but our Ohio settlers worked on the same problems in association with the East, but solved them independently and for themselves.
What a remarkable transition in this century of time! Peo- pled by sons of Europe's greatest nations, gathered from Vir- ginia, New England, Pennsylvania, New York-children of such ancestors, it is little wonder that Ohio is a great state and her people a great people! For years she was styled "The Gateway of the West." The equal of any of the states in education and re- ligion, guided by principles of eternal right, when Ohio's voice has spoken the Nation has responded. When others doubted and faltered, her people led, and fearlessly sustained those prin- ciples and policies which have become the law of the Nation and the admiration of the world.
Her people led the way in the abolition of slavery, and freely gave her sons to defend the Nation's life in the hour of severest trial and greatest danger.
In her century of life Ohio has increased in population a thousand fold, while during the same period she has added to. other states by emigration, two millions of people, over one mil- lion of whom were born in Ohio. Truly an illustrious record. Only complete by adding her exalted claim as the "Mother of Presidents," and the peer in civilization of any state in the Union.
Born in Ohio and a life-long resident of the city of San- dusky, from my early manhood I have been profoundly inter- ested in the state and the great Northwest. It has been my rec- reation to study its peoples, its social and material conditions, and the history of its continuous and wonderful advance in wealth and civilization ; and naturally, in all these studies and reflections, my mind has fastened its greatest interest upon our own state of Ohio. Naturally, too, during all these years I have been gradually collecting the written history of the state, until now I
92
Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.
think I may say, perhaps with pardonable pride, at least without the intention of boasting of it, that I have as complete an individual collection of such historical data as can be found within her bor- ders. Speaking from the vantage ground afforded me by these studies it has become a matter of increasing surprise to me that there should have been so much discussion and misunderstanding as to the date of the actual organization of the state and its ad- mission to the Union; for the determination of the one fact necessarily determines the other, as I shall hope to clearly demon- strate. I shall later allude to the principal contentions out of which the confusion on this subject has arisen, but before I go to that I want to notice the well-meant endeavor of the Ohio Legislature to set the matter at rest, and to briefly comment upon the singular ease with which errors creep into matters in which absolute accuracy is of the highest importance.
Prior to the adjournment of the last session of the Legisla- ture of Ohio the following joint resolution was adopted :
JOINT RESOLUTION,
Relative to the Centennial Anniversary of the Admission of Ohio into the Union:
WHEREAS, On the twenty-ninth day of November, 1802, the first con- stitution of Ohio was ratified by the convention which framed it; and,
WHEREAS, On February 17, 1803, Congress passed an act admitting Ohio into the Union under that constitution; and,
WHEREAS, On March 1, 1803, the first General Assembly of Ohio assembled and organized and Ohio thereupon became a state.
Then follows the balance of the resolution which is in refer- ence to the proper celebration of these events, and which it is not necessary to my present purpose to quote.
Now the significance of this quotation is this: The first constitution of Ohio was adopted by the convention which framed it, as above stated, on November 29, 1802. It is equally true that the first General Assembly of Ohio, met and organized under that constitution, on March 1, 1803; but it is not true that on February 17, 1803, Congress passed an act admitting Ohio into the Union ; indeed, on the contrary, it has been the widely accepted
93
Ohio Centennial.
idea of writers and historians that Congress never passed any act specifically admitting Ohio to the Union. I think I shall be able to show that this is an error; but certain it is that Congress passed no such act on the seventeenth of February, 1803.
An act, originating in the Senate, was passed by the body February 7, 1803, went to the House and was passed February 12, 1803, and was approved February 19, 1803, and became a law from that date. This is the act which was intended, no doubt, by the resolution above quoted. This latter date has been much contended for as the precise date of the admission of Ohio to the Union.
I shall pass this matter, for the present, with the remark that the act of Congress of this date had no reference to the admission of Ohio to the Union. It merely extended the operation of the laws of the United States to the new state then in process of formation and created a Federal district court to take the place- of the territorial court, when that should be superseded by the operation of the constitution, provided for the appointment of a district judge, a district attorney and a United States mar- shal, the compensation of the judge to begin at the date of his appointment, a date which the act did not attempt to fix but left to be determined by those events which should finally determine the time when Ohio should cease to be a territory and become a state. The second session of the Seventh Congress was soon to close, and had not provision of some such character as this been made, the new state would have been without a Federal court until after the first Monday in December, 1803. But I shall refer to this act more at length, later.
It would seem that this resolution of Ohio's last General Assembly, in so far as correct, was well-timed; for, when a state has entered the last year of its first century its natal day, the day on which its state life began, should be the subject of neither doubt nor discussion. I am convinced that a candid examination of the data which I have collected will finally settle any remaining doubts that may exist. Indeed I think that a brief review of the early history of the territory and the state, and of the acts of Con- gress in reference to the matter will be of interest and will cause.
94
Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.
some surprise that there should ever have been any doubt or con- troversy upon this subject.
Ohio was the fourth state admitted under the constitution of the United States, and stood seventeenth on the roll of states. Vermont and Kentucky were formed from other states, and had never been organized as territories. Tennessee had been known as the "territory south of the river Ohio." For none of these three states was there an Enabling Act of Congress. Since the admission of Ohio by the Enabling Act of April 30, 1802, all the states since admitted have been under acts, the features of which have been copied largely after that act.
It is also a singular fact that, of all the states that have been admitted into the Union since the national life began in 1776, Ohio is the only one in regard to which any question has been raised as to the time when she became a state. This can be ac- counted for, in part, by the fact that no early history of the state was written. Then when Harris's "Tour" was published in 1805, he made the grave blunder of stating that "Ohio was admitted into the Union by an act of Congress, April 28, 1802." There is little doubt that he referred to the Enabling Act of April 30, 1802, of which we shall have more to say. Books of any sort were not plentiful in those days, and newspapers were scarcer than books!
In 1833, when the Hon. S. P. Chase published his sketch of the history of Ohio, in speaking of the propositions contained in the Enabling Act, and the modifications of them proposed by the constitutional convention of Ohio in 1802, and submitted to Con- gress with the new state constitution, he says: "Congress as- sented to the proposed modifications and thus completed the com- pact ; Ohio was now a state and a member of the Federal Union." But he gives no date, though the date of the final act of Congress assenting to these modifications is March 3, 1803. It is, how- ever, the better opinion that the acceptance or rejection either of the original propositions of Congress or of the modifications above alluded to, had absolutely nothing to do with the forma- tion of Ohio or her admission to the Union. And I submit it as a singular fact and as in part accounting for the want of knowl- edge on the part of the people of Ohio as to the early history of our state, that this work of Mr. Chase's was the first published
95
Ohio Centennial.
history of the state, and when issued in 1833, was spoken of as an invaluable acquisition to every enlightened citizen of the state ; and Mr. Chase was heralded as its first historian. It was also commented upon that the first volume of the "Statutes of Ohio and the Northwest Territory" by S. P. Chase, which included the preliminary history of Ohio, was all of it of Ohio manufac- ture. The paper was made by E. T. Coxe & Company, of Zanes- ville, and the printing and binding were done in Cincinnati.
In 1838, Caleb Atwater, in his history, named February 19, 1803, the date of the Federal Judiciary Act of Congress before re- ferred to, as the date of admission. Hickey, on the Constitution, names November 29, 1802, the date of the adoption of that in- strument, as the true date. Hildreth, in the fifth volume of his history, fixes the date as March I, 1803, and, in my judgment, he is correct. Walker, in his history of Athens County, names the date of the act of Congress assenting to the modifications of the propositions of the enabling act, as proposed by the constitu- tional convention, which was March 3, 1803, thus, in effect, fol- lowing the idea of Chase. In Black's Ohio, the date named is February 19, 1803. Hon. Rufus King in his history of Ohio fixes the date as March I, 1803, as does also Samuel Adams Drake in his history of the Ohio Valley States. In 1888, Black's Story of Ohio was published; and within the last two years the president of an Ohio college, a leading educator, insisted that Ohio became a state on the nineteenth day of February, 1803. Even the late president of Marietta College in October, 1887, in an article on this subject published in one of the popular maga- zines, claims that : "The question as to the admission of Ohio is between the dates November 29, 1802, and February 19, 1803," and he contends that the latter is the true date because the act of Congress of that date, the Federal Judiciary Act before re- ferred to, to use his language: "Transformed Ohio from a ter- ritory into a state."
This contention might be dismissed for the present with the remark that Congress has no power to create a state, hence it could not work the alleged transformation even if so disposed. The creation of a state is peculiarly the business of the inhabit- ants of the territory in question, under certain sanctions imposed
96
Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.
by the Federal constitution, provided that territory belongs to the United States. It is fair to add, however, that on the date- contended for - February 19, 1803 - the constitution of Ohio, together with the memorial heretofore referred to, were in the possession of Congress; and that by the terms of the constitution it was then well known and generally understood that the new state would complete its organization on the first Tuesday of March, 1803, that day falling on March I.
This writer also overlooked the significant fact that the court provided for by this act was not organized until March 1, 1803, and that the first session of the court, as provided by the act itself, was to be held on the first Monday in June, 1803 ..
It would seem that these facts would be sufficient to effectu- ally dispose of the argument that because the preamble of the act in question recognizes the state of Ohio by name and the body of the act provides for the administration of the laws of the United States and creates a Federal court to administer them therein, it thereby creates a state and also admits it into the Union ! But I shall have occasion to notice this argument again later on.
In the seventeenth volume of the Magazine of American History are two articles upon this subject ; one argues that Ohio became a state on the date of the adoption of the new con- stitution, November 29, 1802; the other contending that Ohio became a state on the nineteenth day of February, 1803, and his arguments are practically the same as those already noticed.
It is true that the act of Congress of that date is the first which recognizes Ohio by name, but it is equally and incon- testably true that the exact status of Ohio at that date was that of a body politic, an unorganized and inchoate state. And this. was the status of the state from the date of the adoption of the constitution November 29, 1802, during the formative period, when under Schedule 6 of the constitution the elections of Jan- uary II, 1803, were held and officers necessary for the com- plete civil organization of the state were elected; and up to the date of the meeting and organization of the first General As- sembly of the state and the complete and final civil organization thereof and consequent cessation of the territorial government and its functions on the first day of March, 1803 ..
97
Ohio Centennial.
Other claims and arguments as to Ohio's natal day could be given, but it is unnecessary, as the references already made establish the fact that great doubt and uncertainty have existed until a recent period, at least upon this important question.
My first claim is: That the act of Congress of April 30, 1802, commonly called the Enabling Act, while it gave the in- habitants of the eastern division of the territory northwest of the river Ohio permission to form a state, did not of itself create the state. And it follows that April 30, 1802, can be consid- ered neither as the date of the creation of the state nor of its admission to the Union. Although by force of the first section of that very act the new state would become a member of the Union "when formed," that is at the very moment when its civil organization should become complete. This will more clearly appear on an examination of the preamble and first sec- tion of the act itself. The preamble is as follows :
An act to enable the people of the eastern division of the Ter- ritory Northwest of the river Ohio to form a state government, and for the admission of such state into the Union on an equal footing with the original states; and for other purposes.
Now it is certainly competent for us to look at this preamble in order to determine what were the original intentions of its framers. As to whether or not those intentions were carried out we must look to the act itself. It is evident from the language employed that the intention was not only to confer upon the people of the territory in question the right to form a state, but also, by the same act, to admit that state, when formed, to the Union. And upon reference to the first section of the act we see that this intention was clearly carried out. It is as follows :
Be it enacted, etc., That the inhabitants of the eastern division of the territory Northwest of the river Ohio, be, and they are hereby authorized to form for themselves a constitution and state government, and to assume such name as they shall deem proper; and the said state when formed shall be admitted into the Union, upon the same footing with the original states, in all respects whatever.
Now it seems perfectly clear that Congress by virtue of this act not only granted to the people of the territory in question 0. C .- 7
1
98
Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.
all needful permission to form for themselves a constitution and state government, but that by force of this very act that state, when formed, was admitted into the Union. That this is the correct construction of the act is plain from the language of the preamble, from the language of the section quoted, and from the fact that no other formal act admitting Ohio to the Union was ever passed. No other act could add anything to this. Ohio was specifically admitted to the Union by this act, although then neither formed nor named.
Now in further confirmation of the fact that this is the cor- rect construction of this act and to show that it is the construction placed on it by those who were contemporary to these events, I will give you a brief letter written by one of the brightest and most energetic men in public life in the Northwestern Territory in those days, and one who was by all writers admitted to have done more to effect Ohio's admission as a state than any other, and who was elected the first United States senator in 1803, re- elected in 1810 and resigned his seat in the Senate in 1814 to accept the office of governor of Ohio, an office to which he was in turn re-elected. This letter was written to Col. Nathaniel Massie, who, by the way, was a brother-in-law of Charles Wil- ling Byrd, and is as follows :
WASHINGTON, April 30th, 1802.
I do myself the pleasure to enclose you a copy of the Act for the admission of the Territory into the Union as a State. I leave this place in an hour.
THOMAS WORTHINGTON.
Now, as the act of April 30, 1802, admits the new state when formed, the important ultimate question is, on what date was the state of Ohio formed ?
My second claim is : That November 29, 1802, the date on which the constitutional convention held in pursuance of the Enabling Act of Congress completed its work, the day on which the first constitution of Ohio was signed and approved, cannot be considered as the day on which the state was formed, because the convention by its work up to that point had created only a body politic, an unorganized or inchoate state; the complete or-
99
Ohio Centennial.
ganization of which was postponed by the express provisions of the constitution itself until the first Tuesday in March, 1803, which day was March 1, 1803. See Article I, section 25, con- stitution of Ohio, 1802.
That the territorial condition of the new state was not terminated by the adoption of the constitution on November 29, 1802, and that it did continue by the very terms of the instru- ment itself, as has been shown, until March 1, 1803, was thor- oughly understood at that time. In the first place, among the membership of the convention which framed the constitution eight, or nearly one-fourth of the entire body, were then mem- bers of the Territorial Legislature, and they may be presumed to have known the provisions of that instrument which was to legislate them out of office. Then we find in "American State Papers - Miscellaneous," volume I, page 343, a letter written by the distinguished Edward Tiffin, president of that convention and afterwards governor of Ohio, to the Honorable the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States, trans- mitting to Congress the constitution for submission to that body, under the date of December 4, 1802; and he directs it from Chil- licothe, N. W. Territory, and not from the state of Ohio. This distinctly shows what was understood to be the status of the new state at that time and its accuracy cannot be impeached.
It is also safe to say that President Jefferson knew when Ohio was entitled to be considered as one of the states of the Union, yet in his annual message of December 15, 1802, he makes no allusion to the admission of the state, and as late as January II, 1803, he is still unaware of its existence, as is shown by the following entry found in the Executive Journal of the United States Senate for the year 1803, page 433, which is very significant :
I nominate Joseph Wood of the North Western Territory, to be Register of the Land Office at Marietta in said Territory and in place of P. Foster resigned; and Griffith Green to be collector for the District of Marietta in the North Western Territory and inspector of the Revenue for the same. January 11th, 1803.
TH. JEFFERSON.
100
Ohio Arch. and His. Society Publications.
The president of the United States, if anyone, should know to a certainty whether on January II, 1803, Marietta was lo- cated in the state of Ohio or in the Northwestern Territory; and it may be safely assumed that he did know, and that at that time Ohio was not a state of the Union. The date of these ap- pointments and the residence of the appointees, as named by the above entry are conclusive that President Jefferson on Jan- uary II, 1803, knew that Marietta was then a city of the North- western Territory, and that the state of Ohio as a state did not then exist.
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.