Part 1

THE WYANDOTTE CONVENTION AN ADDRESS,

Delivered By

JOHN A. MARTIN,

——at the——

Re-Union of the Members and Officers

——of the——

WYANDOTTE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.

HELD AT

WYANDOTTE, KANSAS, JULY 29, 1882.

ATCHISON, KAS: HASKELL & SON, PRINTERS. —1882.—

THE WYANDOTTE CONVENTION.

MR. PRESIDENT:

It is often charged that participants in assemblages of this character are apt to exaggerate the importance of the occasion they commemorate, and after the manner of one of our poets, sing in chorus: "I celebrate myself." Perhaps I can speak of the Wyandotte Convention and its work without being accused of this self-gratulation; for I was more of an observer of its proceedings than a participant in them. I recorded what was done, but I had no part or lot in the doing. If its work had been crude or weak, I could not fairly have been held responsible for the failure. As it was strong, efficient and enduring, I can felicitate you, the survivors of those who wrought this great service for Kansas, without a suspicion of self-praise.

KANSAS CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS.

Four Conventions framed Constitutions for this State. The first assembled at Topeka, on the 23d of October, 1855, and adjourned on the 11th of November, after a session of twenty days. It was composed of forty-seven members, of whom thirty-one signed the Constitution. On the 15th of December this instrument was submitted to the people for ratification or rejection. Only 1,777 ballots were cast, all but 46 being favorable. One of its sections, a provision excluding negroes and mulattoes from the State, was submitted as an independent proposition, and adopted by an affirmative vote of 1,287, to 453 against it.

The second convention was that held at Lecompton, which met on the 7th of June, 1857, and after a session of four days, adjourned until the 19th of October, a final adjournment being reached on the 3d of November. It was composed of sixty-four members, forty-five of whom signed the organic law it framed, and its session continued twenty days. No direct vote on this Constitution was provided for. The Schedule ordered two forms of ballot, one, the "Constitution with Slavery," the other, "Constitution with no Slavery." It was the old turkey and buzzard choice. The Free State men refused to vote at the election, held on the 21st of December, and only 6,712 ballots were cast, 6,147 being for Slavery and 569 against Slavery. The Free State men had, however, elected a majority of the Territorial Legislature in October, and at a special session of that body, held in December, a law was passed providing for a direct vote on the Constitution. This election was held on the 14th of January, 1858, resulting: against the Constitution, 10,266; for, 164—the pro-Slavery men not voting. A third vote on the Lecompton instrument was taken August 2d, 1858, Congress having ordered its re-submission under the terms of the English bill. Again it was rejected, the ballots in its favor being only 1,788, and those against it, 11,300.

The Leavenworth Convention met at Minneola, March 23d, 1858, and at once adjourned to Leavenworth, where it re-assembled March 25th. It was composed of ninety-five members, was in session only eleven days, and the Constitution it framed was signed by eighty-three persons. This instrument was adopted at an election held May 11th, by a very small vote, the pro-Slavery men taking no part in the contest. It was never a popular organic law, and many Free State men who supported it did so under protest. An earnest effort was made, by the Republicans, to secure the admission of Kansas under the Topeka Constitution, and by the Democrats, with a few exceptions to bring the Territory in under the Lecompton Constitution. But no serious or determined contest was waged, in Congress, for admission under the Leavenworth Constitution, and in less than eight months the movement in its behalf was formally abandoned.

THE WYANDOTTE CONVENTION.

Early in February, 1859, the Territorial Legislature passed an act submitting to the people the question of calling a Constitutional Convention. This vote was taken March 28th, and resulted: For, 5,306; against, 1,425. On the 10th of May, 1859, the Republican party of Kansas was organized, at Osawatomie, and at the election held on the 7th of June, for delegates to the Wyandotte Convention, the Republican and Democratic parties confronted each other in Kansas for the first time. The Democrats carried the counties of Leavenworth, Doniphan, Jefferson and Jackson, and elected one of the two delegates from Johnson. The Republicans were successful in all the other Counties voting. The total vote polled was 14,000. The Republican membership was thirty five; Democratic, seventeen.

The Convention then chosen assembled on the 5th day of July, 1859. In its composition it was an unusual, not to say remarkable, Kansas assemblage. Apparently the chiefs of the contending parties had grown weary of Constitution making, or regarded this fourth endeavor in that line as a predestined failure, for they were conspicuous by their absence. In the Topeka Convention nearly every prominent man of the Free State party had a seat. Gen. Lane was its President, and Charles Robinson, Martin F. Conway, Marcus J. Parrott, Wm. Y. Roberts, Geo. W. Smith, Philip C. Schuyler, C. K. Holliday, Mark W. Delahay, and many other recognized Free State leaders, were members. In the Leavenworth Convention there was a similar gathering of widely-known Free State men. Conway was its President, and Lane, Roberts, Thos. Ewing, jr., Henry J. Adams, H. P. Johnson, S. N. Wood, T. Dwight Thacher, P. B. Plumb, Joel K. Goodin, A. Larzalere, W. F. M. Arny, Chas. H. Branscomb, John Ritchey, and many other influential Free State chiefs or partizans, were among its members.

THE MEMBERSHIP.

In the Wyandotte Convention all the noted Free State leaders were conspicuously absent. Its roll-call was made up of names generally new in Kansas affairs, and largely unknown in either the Free State or pro-Slavery councils. Its President, James M. Winchell, his colleague, Wm. McCullough, and John Ritchey, of Shawnee, had been members of the Leavenworth Convention; Col. Caleb May, of Atchison, and W. R. Griffith, of Bourbon, had been members of both the Topeka and the Leavenworth Conventions; and Jas. M. Arthur, of Linn, had been a member of the Topeka Convention. But their prominence was largely local. On the Democratic side, too, appeared men before unnoted in the annals of the stirring and tremendous conflict that had for years made the young Territory the cynosure of a Continent's interest. None of the prominent pro-Slavery men who sat in the Lecompton Convention or the pro-Slavery Legislatures—Calhoun, Stringfellow, Henderson, Elmore, Wilson, Carr and others—appeared in this body.

Perhaps the absence of these party leaders was a fortunate thing for the Convention and the incipient State. For in discriminating intelligence, in considerate zeal for the welfare of the people, in catholic grasp of principles, and in capacity for defining theories clearly and compactly, the members of this body were not wanting. On the other hand, there were fewer jealousies and far less wrangling than would have been possible had the envious and aspiring party leaders been present. I think it is certain that the work was better done, done with more sobriety, sincerity, prudence and real ability, than would have resulted had the recognized chiefs of the rival parties been on the floor of the Convention. The pioneers—the John Baptists—of the Free State cause were all at Topeka, and the Constitution they framed is disfigured by some blotches and much useless verbiage. The leaders were all at Leavenworth, where they schemed for precedence, and spread traps to catch one another, and quarreled over non-essentials, and did everything but make a popular Constitution. Lecompton was the last expression of a beaten, desperate and wrong-headed, but intellectually vigorous faction, and was really, barring the mean method of its submission, and its attempt to perpetuate Slavery, an admirable organic law.

The younger men of the Territory constituted the Convention at Wyandotte. They came upon the field fresh, enthusiastic, and with a place in the world of thought and action to conquer. They recognized the fact that they must do extremely well to secure popular favor, and they set about their task with industry, intelligence and prudence. They were not martyrs or reformers, as many of those at Topeka were; nor jealous politicians or factionists, as most of those at Leavenworth were. They had no old battles to fight over again, no personal feuds to distract them, no recollection of former defeats or victories to reverse or maintain. They were their own prophets. They had had no experience in Constitution making, and hence did not look backward. They were not specialists. A few had hobbies, but the vast majority had no bees buzzing in their bonnets. A few were dogmatic, but the many were anxious to discuss, and willing to be convinced. A few were loquacious, but the majority were thinkers and workers. Some were accomplished scholars, but the majority were men of ordinary education, whose faculties had been sharpened and trained by the hard experience of an active and earnest life. Many were vigorous, direct, intelligent speakers; several were really eloquent; and a few may justly be ranked with the most versatile and brilliant men Kansas has ever numbered among her citizens.

Very few were old men. Only fifteen of the fifty-two members were over forty. Over one-third were under thirty, and nearly two-thirds under thirty-five. Very few, as I have said, had previously appeared as representatives of the people in any Territorial assemblage, and this was especially true of the men whose talents, industry and force soon approved them leaders. Samuel A. Kingman had been in the Territory only about eighteen months, and was unknown, outside of Brown county, until he appeared at Wyandotte. Solon O. Thacher was a young lawyer of Lawrence, never before prominent in public affairs. John J. Ingalls had served, the previous winter, as Engrossing Clerk of the Territorial Council. Samuel A. Stinson was a young attorney, recently from Maine. William C. McDowell had never been heard of outside of Leavenworth, Benjamin F. Simpson was a boyish-looking lawyer from Miami county, and John T. Burris had been practicing, for a year or two, before Justices' courts in Johnson county. John P. Slough had been a member of the Ohio Legislature, but was a new comer in Kansas; and E. G. Ross was the publisher of a weekly newspaper at Topeka.

One-half of the members had been in the Territory less than two years. Six came in 1854, four in 1855, and twelve in 1856, while Mr. Forman, of Doniphan, dated his residence from 1843; Mr. Palmer, of Pottawatomie, from 1854, and Mr. Houston, of Riley, from 1853. Forty-one were from Northern States, seven from the South, and four were of foreign birth, England, Scotland, Ireland, and Germany each contributing one. It appears singular that only one of the Western States, Indiana, was represented in the membership, that State furnishing six delegates. Twelve hailed from New England, Ohio contributed twelve, Pennsylvania six, and New York four. Only eighteen belonged to the legal profession—an unusually small number of lawyers in such a body. Sixteen were farmers, eight merchants, three physicians, three manufacturers, one a mechanic, one a printer, one a land agent, and one a surveyor. The oldest member was Robert Graham, of Atchison, who was 55; the youngest, Benj. F. Simpson, of Lykins Co., (now Miami,) who was 23.

A WORKING BODY.

It was a working body, from the first hour of its session until the last. There is a tradition that the Continental Congress which promulgated the Declaration of Independence was materially hastened in its deliberations over that immortal document by swarms of flies that invaded the hall where it sat, and made the life of its members a burden. Perhaps the intense heat of the rough-plastered room where the Convention met, or the knowledge that Territorial scrip would be received by importunate landlords only at a usurious discount, had something to do with urging dispatch in business. But certainly the Convention went to work with an energy and industry I have never seen paralleled in a Kansas deliberative body since that time. It perfected its organization, adopted rules for its government, discussed the best mode of procedure in framing a Constitution, and appointed a Committee to report upon that subject, during the first day's session; all the standing Committees were announced on the third day; and by the close of the fifth day it had disposed of two very troublesome contested election cases, decided that the Ohio Constitution should be the model for that of Kansas, perfected arrangements for reporting and printing its debates, and instructed its Committees upon a number of disputed questions. The vote on selecting a model for the Constitution was, on the second ballot: for the Ohio Constitution, 25 votes; Indiana, 23; and Kentucky, 1. So our Kansas Constitution was modeled after that of Ohio—something, I think, as the farmer's new house was designed after his old one; it was built upon the old site.

THE COMMITTEES.

The Chairmanships of the different Committees were assigned as follows: Preamble and Bill of Rights—Wm. Hutchinson, of Lawrence. Executive Department—John P. Greer, of Shawnee. Legislative Department—Solon O. Thacher, of Lawrence. Judicial Department—Samuel A. Kingman, of Brown Co. Military—James G. Blunt, of Anderson Co. Electors and Elections—P. H. Townsend, of Douglas. Schedule—John T. Burris, of Johnson. Apportionment—H. D. Preston, of Shawnee. Corporations and Banking—Robert Graham, of Atchison. Education and Public Institutions—W. R. Griffith, of Bourbon Co. County and Township Organizations—John Ritchey, of Topeka. Ordinance and Public Debt—James Blood, of Lawrence. Finance and Taxation—Benj. F. Simpson, of Lykins. Amendments and Miscellaneous—S. D. Houston, of Riley Co. Federal Relations—T. S. Wright, of Nemaha Co. Phraseology and Arrangements—John J. Ingalls, of Atchison.

I have studied the composition of these Committees with some interest, reviewing the work of their members in the Convention, and recalling their subsequent careers. And it appears to me that in making them up, President Winchell exhibited phenomenally quick and accurate judgment of men. He was, indeed, one of the best presiding officers I have ever known. His imperturbable coolness, never for an instant ruffled by the most sudden and passionate outbreaks of excitement in the Convention; his mastery of all the niceties of parliamentary law; his uniform courtesy and tact; his promptness and clearness in stating his decisions; and above all, the mingled grace and kindness and firmness with which he announced to an indignant member an adverse decision, were really wonderful. But what shall be said of that still more wonderful prescience with which he made up the Committees? What induced this calm, grey-eyed, observing little man, whose brass-buttoned blue coat was first seen by two-thirds of the Convention on the morning of the 5th of July—what impelled him, within twenty-four hours, to select an obscure, dull-looking, shock-headed country doctor as Chairman of the Military Committee, and thus name in connection with military affairs, for the first time, the only Kansas soldier who reached a full Major Generalship? How did he happen to pass by half a dozen more widely known lawyers, and appoint as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, a man who, during more than fifteen years thereafter, occupied a place on the Supreme Bench of the State, for the greater portion of this time as the Chief Justice? How came he to recognize so quickly, in the Engrossing Clerk of the Territorial Legislature, the ripest scholar and the fittest man in the body for the Chairmanship of the Committee to which every article of the Constitution was referred for final revision and amendment? In the youngest and most boyish-looking member he found the man who was to form, for this State, a code of Finance and Taxation whose clear directions and wholesome restrictions have guarded Kansas against the wasteful extravagance of Legislatures and the curse of a burdensome public debt, during all the tempting and perilous affairs of its first quarter of a century. And he named, as head of the Committee on Education, the first State Superintendent of Public Instruction. All of his appointments were made with rare judgment, but those mentioned appear notably discerning.

PROGRESS OF WORK.

On the sixth day a resolution favoring biennial sessions of the Legislature—adopted sixteen years afterward—was submitted and referred. The first of a long series of resolutions or proposed sections of the Constitution, prohibiting the settlement of negroes or mulattoes within the limits of the State, was also introduced. This question, with others of a kindred nature, such as propositions to prohibit colored children attending the schools, or to exclude them from the University, or to forbid the appropriation of any funds for their education, and last, and meanest of all, to deny to negroes the shelter of county poor houses when poor and helpless, was voted upon again and again, first in one form and then in another, and to the enduring honor of the majority, always defeated. It seems singular, in this day and generation, that such theories found persistent and earnest advocates. But it should be remembered that all this happened before the war, when slavery was still an "institution" in nearly half the States of the Union. The pro-Slavery party was, of course, solidly in favor of excluding free negroes from the State, and less than four years prior to the meeting of the Convention, the Free State party, in voting on the Topeka Constitution, had given a decided majority in favor of such exclusion. It therefore required genuine courage and principle to go upon record against each and every proposition of this character. For very few members who so voted felt absolutely certain of the endorsement of their constituents.

The first Article of the Constitution reported, that on Corporations and Banks, was submitted on the sixth day and considered. It was stated, by the President, that many other Committees had their reports in the hands of the printer, and during the next few days they began to come in very rapidly. The Convention, to expedite work, adopted a resolution requiring all Committees to report on or before Saturday, the eleventh day of the session.

THE BOUNDARIES OF THE STATE.

On the seventh day the annexation of that portion of Nebraska lying south of the Platte river, was formally considered. The then organized Nebraska counties included in that section of our sister State had elected delegates to the Convention, who were present earnestly advocating annexation. This proposition was discussed during several days, and the debates took a wide range. The Nebraska delegates were admitted to seats as honorary members, with the privilege of speaking on this subject. The final determination, however, was to preserve the original Northern line. Two influences induced this decision, one political, the other local and material. Many Republicans feared that the South Platte Country was, or would be likely to become, Democratic. Lawrence and Topeka both aspired to be the State Capital, and their influence was against annexation, because they feared it would throw the center of population far north of the Kaw.

The Preamble and Bill of Rights was reported on the tenth day, and opened the whole question of the State's boundaries. The Committee proposed the twenty-third meridian as the western line, and the fortieth parallel as the line on the north. This would have excluded about ninety miles of territory within the present limits of the State. The Committee's recommendation was, however, adopted, and stood as the determination of the Convention until the day before the final adjournment, when Col. May, of Atchison, secured a reconsideration, and on his motion the twenty-fifth parallel was substituted for the twenty-third. The northern boundary question was finally settled on the fifteenth day, when, by a vote of 19 ayes to 29 nays, the Convention refused to memorialize Congress to include the South Platte country within the limits of Kansas.

FEATURES OF THE CONSTITUTION.

On the seventh day the Legislative and Judicial Committees reported. The Legislative article was considered next day. The Committee proposed that bills might originate in either House, but Mr. Winchell submitted a novel amendment, which required all laws to originate in the House of Representatives. This was adopted, notwithstanding the vigorous opposition of Mr. Thacher, the Chairman of the Committee, by a vote of 37 to 13. It survived the admission of the State only three years, being amended in 1864.

On the eighth day the Militia article was adopted; on the ninth day the Judicial article was perfected, and the article on Education and Public Institutions reported and discussed; and on the tenth day the Committees on County and Township Organizations, and Schedule, reported. The deathless pertinacity of a "claim" is illustrated by a petition presented that day, from one Samuel A. Lowe, a clerk of the so-called "Bogus Legislature," who wanted pay for certain work he alleged he had performed. Only a year ago Mr. Lowe presented the same claim to Congress, and it was, I believe allowed by the House. But the Kansas Senators made such determined war on it that Mr Lowe can still sing, "a claim to keep I have."

I have mentioned the fact that Mr Winchell was the author of the section providing that all bills should originate in the House. It should be stated that Mr. Ingalls was the author of the provision that "in actions for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury, and if it shall appear that the alleged libelous matter was published for justifiable ends, the accused shall be acquitted." Another original provision of the Constitution is the Homestead section. This was first proposed by Mr. Foster, of Leavenworth county, on the sixth day of the session, and reported by the Committee on Miscellaneous and Amendments, on the thirteenth day. No other feature of the Constitution, perhaps, elicited more animated and earnest debate. It was discussed for several days; amended, referred, and again submitted. As originally reported, it provided for the exemption of "a homestead of 160 acres of land, or a house and lot not exceeding $2,000 in value, or real, personal and mixed property not exceeding $2,000, to any family." This was adopted by a vote of 28 ayes to 16 nays. Two days later the vote was reconsidered, and President Winchell proposed the wording finally adopted: "A homestead of 160 acres of farming land, or of one acre within the limits of an incorporated town or city, occupied as a residence by the family of the owner, together with all the improvements on the same, shall be exempted from forced sale under any process of law, and shall not be alienated without the joint consent of husband and wife, where the relation exists." Thus perfected, it was adopted by a vote of 33 to 7.